Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
I agree with DOB's article I said much the same myself in November.Dan O'Brien in The Independent this morning sums it up perfectly for me: 'The backstop demand could end up bringing about that which it was designed to prevent'.
https://www.independent.ie/opinion/...hich-it-was-designed-to-prevent-37622042.html
The problem is that we can't back down now. Besides the fact that Simon Varadkar have ensured that such a climbdown would be a domestic electoral disaster, our EU colleagues would say "WTF?". Some on the basis that they thought they truly were helping Ireland in what it was claiming was a desperate desire to preserve peace but others like France who have been using the Irish issue to put the Brits in a negotiating corner.Lots of pan Nationalist gloating this morning. But this is in great danger of being a Pyrrhic victory. Ireland is an even bigger loser than the UK if there is a No Deal. Also how many diplomatic credits have we left in the EU bank. How long will we be allowed to maintain our idiosyncratic approach to Corporation Tax?
if there is a"no deal" and if a hard border is such a threat to peace I presume Ireland will immediately dump the EU and join the UK Customs Union.
Leo, Simon Varadkar have never made the "no hard border" an economic argument. How could they? East West trade and indeed the Landbridge to the Continent completely dwarfs any North South economic aspect.Ireland followed into Europe on the UK's coat tails, it would be economic suicide to leave the EU and follow them this time.
For them and indeed for everybody else in pan Natonalism the "not an extra lumen of border visibility" has been ostensibly about protecting the "peace process" (though probably mainly for the sake of rubbing Orange noses in it).
A no deal would involve the EU demanding a very hard border indeed. If we are to be consistent and if we really do believe that this would rattle the IRA's cages (those that haven't gone away, you know) then we would have to refuse to meet the EU's demands.
different times. We were near totally dependent on trade with the UK back then and our currency was pegged to sterling. Our goal was to loosen that stranglehold and open up to European markets and reduce our dependence on UK only trade. We still do a lot of trade with the UK now but we are not as dependent as back then.Ireland followed into Europe on the UK's coat tails, it would be economic suicide to leave the EU and follow them this time.
If there is No Deal there is no backstop. It would not be the UK who would be insisting on a hard border, it would be the EU.Only if the UK backtracks on their commitments.
If there is No Deal there is no backstop.
It would not be the UK who would be insisting on a hard border, it would be the EU.
If there is No Deal there is no backstop.
It would not be the UK who would be insisting on a hard border, it would be the EU.
This is baloney and you know it. If the UK leaves the (a) customs union, it is the UK who is creating the need for a hard border. Passing off the consequences of their decisions onto others is just childish word games. This fools no one, including you.
I am obviously a very bad communicator as my point is being missed completely. For avoidance of all doubt of course I accept that the Brits are to blame for Brexit and if there is a hard border then again the Brits are to blame for starting this whole thing.No, the commitment made on the backstop includes the no deal scenario.
I'd imagine both parties are as likely as each other, and with the DUP's posturing, it might be more in their interest to push that agenda to allay their fears of anything that might increase the chances of any move towards a united Ireland.
It is unclear whether such a course might also be in our economic interest.
The reason the UK is having such difficulty with the Backstop is that they fundamentally don't trust anyone else in a negotiation. There is a very good reason for this; they don't behave with integrity so they don't expect anyone else to either. If they did then the Backstop wouldn't be an issue. What sort of people call a commitment to honour an existing international agreement a trap?
If you want a deal to happen, in any negotiation, you have to a deal the other side can sell to their side (whether that side is a board, or a cabinet or a parliament). If we want a deal, we need to come up with one the UK can sell.
That only works where there is still mutual benefit in such a deal, and both sides enter negotiations with realistic expectations. Media reporting suggests that the UK are holding out for the kind of deal the EU simply cannot offer.
Barnier was deposed as Luxembourg PM for corruption.
Oops that was Juncker..News to me. Will probably come as a surprise to him also.
Nothing Varadkar, Coveney, Merkel & Barnier say or do can be trusted so if the UK are acting that way they have good reason to.
After all the fobbing off of Ireland on bail out deal anyone who trusts a promise from Merkel would be a fool.
All the guff about a hard border and jeopardising the peace from Varadkar-Coveney is nonsense as @Duke of Marmalade has shown.
Barnier was deposed as Luxembourg PM for corruption.
Why can't an international agreement ever be changed as circumstances change?
France, Portugal, Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Germany, Italy ALL had empires. So I guess we shouldn't be in an association with a bunch of imperialists?
There was many an Irishman, north and south, in the vanguard of the British empire. Maybe we should not be in an association with anyone either?
Can you cut out the anti-British racist nonsense?
The Backstop should be overseen by an independent body, not the EU courts. If you want a deal to happen, in any negotiation, you have to a deal the other side can sell to their side (whether that side is a board, or a cabinet or a parliament). If we want a deal, we need to come up with one the UK can sell.
I don't think any of the things May is looking for right now are things the EU cannot offer.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?