Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Fair point. But if you realise that they're batsh!t crazy, then you won't be surprised by anything they do. Disappointed, perhaps. Horrified, even. But not surprised.

Their being batsh1t crazy presents an opportunity.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Their being batsh1t crazy presents an opportunity.

. . . and a threat.

Take it from me. My (admittedly limited) exposure to negotiations tells me that you'd always rather that your negotiating counterparty was sane.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

. . . and a threat.

Take it from me. My (admittedly limited) exposure to negotiations tells me that you'd always rather that your negotiating counterparty was sane.

You would indeed. But when the inherent fact is that the other party is hyped up on populist hubris, and is consequently out of touch with reality, then you can use that mild psychosis to your advantage. Use their delusions of superiority against them. Play into them. Yield in unimportant areas that matter to that sense of nationalistic superiority. Praise them to inflate their egos. Bow the knee to superficial demands. And then stick it to them where it matters.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

You would indeed. But when the inherent fact is that the other party is hyped up on populist hubris, and is consequently out of touch with reality, then you can use that mild psychosis to your advantage. Use their delusions of superiority against them. Play into them. Yield in unimportant areas that matter to that sense of nationalistic superiority. Praise them to inflate their egos. Bow the knee to superficial demands. And then stick it to them where it matters.

That may be your least worst course of action when faced with an interlocutor who's a certifiable loon. But it's not what you want. The only deal that will endure is one that's positively beneficial to both parties.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

That may be your least worst course of action when faced with an interlocutor who's a certifiable loon. But it's not what you want. The only deal that will endure is one that's positively beneficial to both parties.

Well, not necessarily. When you only have two alternatives, a deal that gives you much less than you currently have or no deal which will destroy your economy, you will accept the least worst option. It isn't positively beneficial but it is not as damaging.

But, of course, if you are hypomanic on nationalism, you might storm out of the room into a glorious future free of the EU shackles economic collapse and civil strife.

Peregrinus

Oh, the UK led by loons might accept the deal you say we should offer them. But it won't always be led by loons, and that deal won't last very long. The sooner the UK gets a good deal, the better for the EU.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, the UK led by loons might accept the deal you say we should offer them. But it won't always be led by loons, and that deal won't last very long. The sooner the UK gets a good deal, the better for the EU.

Absolutely. But Johnson is in thrall to the ERG and the new right wing Tory MPs. And he's Cummings's glove puppet. So you are actually dealing with hypomanic populists. They won't back down because they can't be seen to back down. Euroscepticism and British nationalism is their raison d'etre. It is only when their shallow populism is exposed, and they are hunted from power, that Britain will be in a position to negotiate a sane FTA. And that, unfortunately, might take some time.

Also, in all of this, there is a vital existential element for the EU. Britain cannot be better off outside the EU. If it is seen to be better off, that will be the death knell for the EU project. So, without causing too much economic self-harm, they need to stick it to the UK as much as possible.

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, the UK led by loons might accept the deal you say we should offer them. But it won't always be led by loons, and that deal won't last very long. The sooner the UK gets a good deal, the better for the EU.

The real issue is that what a good deal is for the Uk seems to be a bad deal for the EU and vice versa.

From the very beginning the UK have had the idea that a deal gives them everything that they already had, but gets rid of the stuff they didn't like.

Fundamentally, even the BRexiteers acknowledge that the CU and SM are good for the UK, but they don't like all the stuff that goes around that, FoM, ECJ etc.

But they have never been able to work out which bits can are willing to give up. THey continually want Canada +++, which essentially is everything remaining the same expect for the rules etc.

The EU, unsurprisingly, do not want to offer that as it calls into question the very nature of the EU itself.

The last 4 years have been all about trying to get the UK to see that they cannot have everything at no cost, they cannot continue to get all the membership benefit without being a member.

fash

Silent Running wrote: »

I can't help but think that your edit would apply to the EU team. But I lay no blame there. After all, how many could have expected the IM bill?

Sometimes your partner in negotiations is just batsh1t crazy.

Actually I suspect many: Johnson sought legal advice on circumstances where he could renege on NI protocol in October 2019 and rumours of the current plan were circulated by Tim Shipman in march 2020. Plus brexiters had been calling for something in this direction during the summer.

I suspect the Irish government/civil service given its intimate knowledge the history of the UK government had at least considered the possibility of this.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Absolutely. But Johnson is in thrall to the ERG and the new right wing Tory MPs. And he's Cummings's glove puppet. So you are actually dealing with hypomanic populists. They won't back down because they can't be seen to back down. Euroscepticism and British nationalism is their raison d'etre. It is only when their shallow populism is exposed, and they are hunted from power, that Britain will be in a position to negotiate a sane FTA. And that, unfortunately, might take some time.

Yes. My point is that this is a shame. The fact that it will take some time to reach this point is bad for us, not good for us.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Also, in all of this, there is a vital existential element for the EU. Britain cannot be better off outside the EU. If it is seen to be better off, that will be the death knell for the EU project. So, without causing too much economic self-harm, they need to stick it to the UK as much as possible.

We don't need to. Being worse off outside the EU is the natural consequence of Brexit. The EU doesn't have to do anything at all for that outcome to occur. On the contrary, their intervention would be required to try to prevent it.

fash

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Absolutely. But Johnson is in thrall to the ERG and the new right wing Tory MPs. And he's Cummings's glove puppet. So you are actually dealing with hypomanic populists. They won't back down because they can't be seen to back down. Euroscepticism and British nationalism is their raison d'etre. It is only when their shallow populism is exposed, and they are hunted from power, that Britain will be in a position to negotiate a sane FTA. And that, unfortunately, might take some time.

Also, in all of this, there is a vital existential element for the EU. Britain cannot be better off outside the EU. If it is seen to be better off, that will be the death knell for the EU project. So, without causing too much economic self-harm, they need to stick it to the UK as much as possible.

Yeah - there can be no satisfactory deal for the UK outside the EU.
The brexiters' problem is with the existence of the EU- the only solution is to break up the UK and discredit Brexitism utterly.

Peregrinus

fash wrote: »

Yeah - there can be no satisfactory deal for the UK outside the EU.
The brexiters' problem is with the existence of the EU- the only solution is to break up the UK and discredit Brexitism utterly.

That may happen, but there is no need for it (from the EU's point of view).

Leroy42

So is Johnson going to stop the negotiations today like he said? Are we really at the end point or will this roll on for another few weeks yet?

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

So is Johnson going to stop the negotiations today like he said? Are we really at the end point or will this roll on for another few weeks yet?

Of course not. When has he ever cleaved to any of his grand proclamations? I'd say October 31 is the next deadline and it'll be a stiffer one.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes. My point is that this is a shame. The fact that it will take some time to reach this point is bad for us, not good for us.


We don't need to. Being worse off outside the EU is the natural consequence of Brexit. The EU doesn't have to do anything at all for that outcome to occur. On the contrary, their intervention would be required to try to prevent it.

I think the EU should maximise every opportunity to take economic advantage of the UK in ways that suit the EU best. Simultaneously, any other aspects of any agreement should disadvantage the UK in every possible way that doesn't cause harm to the EU, pour encourager les autres. The UK does not deserve any goodwill. Also this is business. The EU's economy and future cohesion is the only guiding principle in these negotiations. That is what will best suit our long term interests.

fash

Peregrinus wrote: »

That may happen, but there is no need for it (from the EU's point of view).

There was a good retweet by David Henig on this:

here
This is the problem. Either the UK is inside the EU or it has an impossible problem considering its Euroscepticism. I don't think that can be resolved.

GM228

Johnson pretty much saying it's time to accept the "Australia solution".

Dubh Geannain

Did anything result from the Internal Market Bill?

Maybe I was tuned out at the time (as I have been many times) but the uproar around it seemed to fizzle out. It's not being mentioned by any of the EU spokespeople as one of the criteria the UK needs to cede on anyway. I thought it would be.

Shelga

Boris Johnson just confirming no deal. This is insanity, surely? Can't believe what I'm hearing.

GM228

Shelga wrote: »

Boris Johnson just confirming no deal. This is insanity, surely? Can't believe what I'm hearing.

And this for me sums the situation up really well:-

https://twitter.com/montychristo8/status/1317060742340816896?s=19

BlitzKrieg

on cue sterling starts dropping

ancapailldorcha

It's just brazenly deceitful to keep invoking Australia's relationship with no deal to plaster over the fact that it's no deal.

Leroy42

So they have failed utterly and completely to deliver the Brexit that was promised. What an admission for a PM. To basically admit that he has no way to solve the problem, no way to get an agreement, and is accepting that the UK is going to be substantially worse off than it was prior to his drive for Brexit.

And the funny thing is that you will have millions cheering him on as if he has actually achieved something.

swampgas

This is what I thought was likely to happen, although I did think Johnson would wait a bit longer before coming out with it.

If Johnson was serious about a deal he would have moved to a position more acceptable to the EU by the middle of the year. What we are seeing now appears to be the end game of a charade of mock negotiations, where every time a deal looked remotely likely another spanner was thrown in the works, the most recent being the Internal Markets Bill. Johnson has run the clock down sufficiently that he can now safely declare a No Deal Brexit, and there isn't enough time for anyone to do anything about it.

Additionally, I imagine his financial backers have been given plenty of advance notice of this announcement so they can optimise their bets on the currency markets.

View

Leroy42 wrote: »

So they have failed utterly and completely to deliver the Brexit that was promised. What an admission for a PM. To basically admit that he has no way to solve the problem, no way to get an agreement, and is accepting that the UK is going to be substantially worse off than it was prior to his drive for Brexit.

And the funny thing is that you will have millions cheering him on as if he has actually achieved something.

Yes and that was with the “oven ready” deal. Imagine what things would be like without an “oven ready” deal. :-)

View

Shelga wrote: »

Boris Johnson just confirming no deal. This is insanity, surely? Can't believe what I'm hearing.

Par for the course.

Brexiters have always opted for the more insane option at every opportunity.

They are probably all still convinced that they just need to hang in there and the EU will blink and come crawling to them for a deal.

Leroy42

So is Johnson going to explain why he felt it was correct to sign off on the WA, tieing the UK to an international agreement, and now they end up with No Deal anyway? What an appalling misjudgment by Johnson to have agreed to the WA without having some idea of what was possible in terms of a trade deal.

Patser

Hang on, when you read into what he's actually said, it's again all bluster.

Talks are to continue, nothing is decided, just that the UK will step up preparations for a No Deal.

The EU have said they're preparing for that possibility for months. Its just a way of saying we're not afraid to walk away. If Johnson had said 'We're done, no deal it is, all talks off', that'd be something.

Panrich

Von Der Leyen has included the omitted 'intensified' word in her tweet after Johnsons speech.

https://twitter.com/vonderleyen/status/1317067827518574593

Leroy42

Patser wrote: »

Hang on, when you read into what he's actually said, it's again all bluster.

Talks are to continue, nothing is decided, just that the UK will step up preparations for a No Deal.

The EU have said they're preparing for that possibility for months. Its just a way of saying we're not afraid to walk away. If Johnson had said 'We're done, no deal it is, all talks off', that'd be something.

Bang on. He never actually says the negotiations are over, he just says the EU needs to change their approach.

So yet another deadline is quietly allowed to pass, yet again the EU calls his bluff.