Monday 10 April 2023

GFA: we got by with a lot of help from our friends

Good Friday Agreement A major theme of the Leave campaign in the Brexit referendum was that the UK should "reclaim" its independence and become a Sovereign Power once more. Freed from the alleged shackles to the EU and behoven to no foreigners we should be able to rove around the world asserting our influence and increasing our prosperity. The 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement in Ireland, which we celebrate today, is a stark reminder that, not only were we then or are we now, a super-duper independent-acting world power, and, for that matter, neither is anyone else. In fact, we weren’t even capable, on our own, of sorting what was and is by world standards, a titchy little problem. The population Northern Ireland is barely 2 million (1 903 100 at the 2021 census if you want to be exact): a mere 3% or so of our population. That some of them were then and still are unhappy with their lot is, like Brexit, a self-inflicted wound. Or more precisely, also like Brexit, a Tory inflicted wound, because not once but three times the Tories torpedoed the attempts of Liberal governments to grant Home Rule to the whole island of Ireland. Indeed, the third time the patriotic "Land of Hope and Glory" Tories actually called upon the army to mutiny if the proposal were implemented. In the end the country was partitioned, a “fudge” unacceptable to “patriots” on both sides of the border. After years of violence, a sort of peace was restored with the Good Friday Agreement, not by the UK government acting alone with Irish government, but with discussions chaired by the United States Senator George Mitchell, and with the President of the United States, Bill Clinton, in close touch on the telephone. I strongly suspect that the welcome rush to massage Prime Minister Johnson’s botched Northern Ireland Protocol into the slightly more acceptable Windsor Framework was motivated by anxiety to curry the favour of US President Biden and ensure his blessing on the anniversary with the visit with which we are to be honoured tomorrow. The purpose of this post is not to air resentment of the involvement of the US or to belittle the difficulty on the situation. It is to point out that most issues these days, be they boundary disputes, drugs, trade, safety standards, human rights, energy, pollution, education, health, sustainability, tourism or whatever, involve international co-operation. The Brexiteers' promise of a nation independent of the ties that bind us to others is a false prospectus. Just as “no man is an island,” neither is a country, even if it is physically surrounded by water.

6 comments:

  1. You seem — as well as not understanding Northern Ireland at all — to have a totally bizarre, warped idea of the sovereignty we reclaimed by leaving the European Union. The point was never to stand aloof from the world; rather it was to get more involved in the world than we ever could as members of a wannabe superstate.

    Take the UK's recent entry into the CPTPP trade agreement, for example. A most excellent example of international co-operation, that would have been impossible to do while we were still in the EU.

    Or take the AUKUS pact. Again, a splendid example of international co-operation; and although it would not have been prohibited by our membership of the European Union (like joining the CPTPP would have been) it would have been diplomatically far more difficult to do the deal if we had had to care what the French thought of it.

    No, leaving the EU and becoming sovereign once again wasn't about turning our backs on international co-operation. It was about in fact increasing our ability to co-operate internationally, by making us able to do all sorts of deals that we might not be able to do if we couldn't act on our own interests rather than being locked into moving with a bunch of other countries whose interests diverge at times wildly from our own; and certainly would not have been able to do as quickly if, for example, a bunch of Flemish farmers about whose opinions we care not a jot had an effective veto over everything (the usual problem with EU deals).

    So, you know, congrats on finding a way to display total ignorance of two completely unrelated topic in one article.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "... a bunch of Flemish farmers about whose opinions we care not a jot ..." Oh dear: not a very co-operative way of regarding the rest of the world. I think you miss the point of my post. Of course we can do deals with other countries but our capacity to do them on fair terms or to exert our influence depends on our strength, which would be greater as a partner in the EU rather than going it alone. The CPTPP deal involves allowing producers to sue our government in secret courts, (the term for them escapes me for the moment) something we turned down when we were in the EU. I can't think why other than deluded post -colonial grand-standing , we should want to be involved AUKUS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "... a bunch of Flemish farmers about whose opinions we care not a jot ..." Oh dear: not a very co-operative way of regarding the rest of the world.

      The point of co-operation is to co-operate with those who share your aims, and not with those — like Flemish farmers — who don’t.

      ,i>I think you miss the point of my post. Of course we can do deals with other countries but our capacity to do them on fair terms or to exert our influence depends on our strength, which would be greater as a partner in the EU rather than going it alone.

      Actually our strength is greater ‘going it alone’ because by ‘going it alone’ we can make promises that we intend to keep without having to run it past 27 other governments whether it’s okay. Who would you rather do a deal with: someone who can say ‘yes’ right there and then, or someone who can only say, ‘I’ll have to see what my 27 friends think before I can sign’?

      The CPTPP deal involves allowing producers to sue our government in secret courts,

      It allows companies to hold governments to account legally if the governments break their own laws. I would have thought you would be in favour of that sort of thing. After all you often write about how you think the government’s policies should be able to be overruled by the courts, don’t you?

      I can't think why other than deluded post -colonial grand-standing , we should want to be involved AUKUS.

      You can’t? You really can’t? How about because China is the greatest threat to our country in the world today, and requires a unified response to counter it? Who is going to provide that response? Not your beloved European Union, not while Macron is making pilgrimage to bow down and kiss Xi’s ring.

      Delete
  3. 1. Are "Flemish farmers" a shorthand for people whom you think have different priorities to you? Whatever, we need to be aware of their positions and try to find ways of working with them for the common good.
    2. The CPTPP deal shows the weakness of negotiating from our lone position. I believe it is expected to add something paltry like 0.08% to our GDP over 10 years.
    3. They are secret courts which, allegedly, put the profits of international commercial corporations over the sovereign rights of legitimate governments. We are not the only ones who want to protect our sovereignty.
    4. How is it China is now a potential enemy? We were allies in the War. And Russia too. Something is going badly wrong

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1. Are "Flemish farmers" a shorthand for people whom you think have different priorities to you?

    No they are Flemish farmers https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/24/eu-trade-deal-with-canada-collapses-as-belgium-refuses-to-sign

    2. The CPTPP deal shows the weakness of negotiating from our lone position. I believe it is expected to add something paltry like 0.08% to our GDP over 10 years.

    Not everything is about adding to GDP. The biggest economic benefit will be in cheap imports which will benefit consumers like you and me. The biggest security benefit will be continuing to shore up the anti-China world.

    3. They are secret courts which, allegedly, put the profits of international commercial corporations over the sovereign rights of legitimate governments. We are not the only ones who want to protect our sovereignty.

    Got your tinfoil hat on, conspiracy man? They are courts which ensure that governments follow the law and don't, for example, expropriate private property without compensation. Which is a good thing.

    4. How is it China is now a potential enemy? We were allies in the War.

    Okay you might want to look up this little thing called the Chinese Communist Party that came to power after the war and then killed 40 million Chinese people. That should explain things for you.

    And Russia too. Something is going badly wrong

    Yes indeed, something is badly wrong in China and Russia and that's why we need to make alliances to push back against them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the massed US glitterati in Ireland this week shows how impotent we are on our own.

      Delete