= Сообщение: 9332 из 12491 ====================================== ENET.SYSOP = От : Michiel van der Vlist 2:280/5555 06 Feb 20 20:47:42 Кому : David Rance 06 Feb 20 20:47:42 Тема : Brexit FGHI : area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:280/5555+5e3c6d5f На : area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:203/2+5e36f0ac = Кодировка сообщения определена как: UTF-8 ================================== ============================================================================== Hello David,
On Sunday February 02 2020 16:54, you wrote to me:
DR> Emmanuel Macron wrote a lovely open letter to the British people. In DR> it he emphasised that we are still friends and neighbours and that he DR> still has a great deal of respect for the UK
Macron is a diplomat. Of course we will remain neighbours. This is not the kind of neighbourship that can be ended by one of the parties moving to the other side of town. Yes, neighbours we are and neighbours we will stay. But friends? I certainly hope so, but I am not all that confident. And then I do not mean the friendship between individuals like you and me, but the friendship between countries. An elder statesman - forgot who - once said "countries have interests, not friends".
DR> and for what we did to help France in WWII.
A sensitive issue. I would have thought twice before bringing that into the equation. Not that I deny the UK part of WWII, certainly not, but I think WWII had better not be part of the negotiations. It is history, it all happened before I was born, nearly all of the people I knew that had active memories of it are dead and the world has changed. Ever so often, especially if - at least for some - it is a black page in history, the past gets in the way of moving on to the future. Fact is that people of Germany are no longer our enemies but are is now our closest neighbours, trade partners and friends. The same goes for people of France and Germany. It is not good for THAT relationship to be constantly reminded of what horible things our parents and grandparents did to each other. To move on, we have to let go of our parent's and grandparent's past. Not forget, but let go.
DR> But he also says that neither he, nor the other EU leaders, will agree DR> to any future deal that would jeopardise the future of the EU economy.
Other EU leaders have said that in order to get access to the EU internal open market, the UK will have to follow EU rules. Period. Like Norway and Switzerland. If they want different rules, the EU internal market will not be open for the UK.
The UK wants different rules. So there will be trade barriers.
The EU will defend the interest of its remaining 27 members. Handing out farewell presents to a parting member is not in the interest of the 27.
DR> And all Boris is saying is that he won't agree to anything that would DR> jeopardise the future UK economy.
DR> So what's wrong with that?
Nothing much on first sight. It should work for those that can recognise a good deal when they see one...
DR> The bargaining will be hard. Neither side will get all they want. DR> Probably won't get much of what they want, if I'm honest.
I am afraid you are right. First: 11 month is far too short a period to complete something as complex as a trade agreement. 11 month is totally unrealistic. CETA took ten years to negotiate and it still has not been ratified by all. TTIP failed after four years of negotiation.
There is an option to extend the 11 month, but it takes both parties to agree on that before 1st of July. Johnson has already said there will be no extension. Well, he may change his mind, you never know with Johnson. But my guestimate is that we have a more than 50% chance of ending with a no deal on 31 December.
But even if the negotiation period is extended to the maximum of two years, I see little chance of a deal that will satisfy all parties. Too much conflict of interest.
DR> But at least the UK is now in a position to do trade deals elsewhere DR> in the world.
I wish you luck, but I am afraid those others will not be all that eager to give the UK a better deal than the one it had with the EU. The Cameron deal was the best deal ever. The UK should have taken it. Any deal with "others" will be significantly less favourable.
DR> However, I hope to goodness that Boris doesn't sign an agreement with DR> Trump because Trump is a bully and I am sure that we would not get a DR> very good deal from him,
Trump will make a very good deal. Good for him. Ending up as the 51st state of the USA is not better than EU membership. And that would be a favourable outcome...
DR> however much he dresses it up. I'm pretty sure Boris is aware of that DR> - for instance, he didn't give in to Trump wanting us to shun a deal DR> with Huawei helping set up our 5G network!
Kudos for saying "no" to Trump. I hope my PM will show the same balls when it comes to the issue of selling ASML chip machines to China. Trump wants to block it. :(
MvdV>> It will be interesting to watch...
DR> It will - but it'll also be somewhat predictable!
If I have learned one thing it is that predicting is difficult. Especially if it concerns the future. The future is a moving target. An ever faster moving target. A lot can happen in 11 month...
DR> It's the same with us and Europe, and for that reason I don't expect DR> that I shall have any bother with my friends and acquaintances in DR> France and Germany, nor with any of you here on this echo.
I don't expect that either. But the relationship between countries?
DR> I'm pleased to note that certain EU leaders, including Emmanuel Macron DR> and Ursula von der Leyen, are now saying that they must look at how it DR> came to pass that the UK felt that they could no longer continue as DR> part of the EU. The same is being said by politicians of all parties DR> in the UK that we must do the same. This is the greatest step forward DR> in my opinion
This didn't make it into the news here, so I have not heard the original wording. But I think you read too much in it. I see it as part of the divorce rituals, to soften the blow, not as making an actual step.
DR> because, underneath it all, we all wanted the EU to work
The UK wanted it to work in a different way, a way incompatible with what others wanted...
DR> and to be willing to look at what went wrong.
What went wrong IMNSHO? I can tell you one thing: The "net contributor" fallacy. There are no net contributors. Yes, by your calculation the UK was a net contributor. By the same calculation The Netherlands is a net contributor. But that calculation is wrong. It only counts the benefit from subsidies. But the trade benefits are far greater. For every Euro of mine that goes the the EU, I get 12 (TWELVE) Euro in return because of the trade benefits. The "net contributior" argument is a fallacy.
It is not a zero sum game.
DR> This is in stark contrast to what you, Michiel, have been saying. I DR> quote you: "the UK have never been more than half hearted members"; DR> "if they want to go, let them go".
I still have that opinion and I am not the only one. No good diplomat will say it out loud, but the opinion makers in the talk shows here are not always diplomats. The observation that the Brittish have never been more than half in anyway is fairly wide spread here in this part of the world...
DR> You believe that the EU is some kind of monolith which cannot be DR> altered, or some kind of club which has rules which have to be obeyed DR> without question. Such inflexibility makes the failure of such DR> institutions inevitable, from the smallest golf club to the largest DR> empire.
Have I forgotten to tell you I am not in the believing business? No, I do not believe that at all, you are putting words into my nouth.
DR> And you cannot tell me that there aren't other EU member states who DR> are wondering if they could do the same as us.
I do not know of any that consider leaving at the moment. On the contrary, new prospective members like North Macedonia and Albania are banging on the gate. It may be different when the Brexit turns out te be a success (by whatever definition of "succces"). Up until now the Brexit has only brought the 27 closer together. My guess is that it will remain like that for the foreseeable future.
DR> The response of some EU leaders is to try to tighten the grip on DR> membership, but don't they realise that this will not work?
It does not work because it is not happening. That the EU is tightening the grip on membership is a false assumption. The EU is not an autonomous being that makes decicions on its own. All EU decisions are decisions made by its members.
It is my opiniom that in order to make a fist against the rest of the world, China, The USA, Russia, it is in the best interest of the 27 to go for an ever closer union. United we stand, divided we fall. I have no problem giving up national Souvereignty. I see it as the next step in souvereign Cities uniting in regional political units and those regional units handing over souverignty to national governments. IMNSHO that is the direction the EU should move. The UK wants to move in the other direction. I regret that but it is as it is. It is their choice...
