Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

prawnsambo wrote: »

Russia is being hit with sanctions. I doubt the UK would be similarly sanctioned, but it's not inconceivable. However their standing in international relations would be permanently damaged. And of course trust would be lost. Very difficult to enter into trade negotiations where the other side always think you're untrustworthy. There would be a high cost associated with that lack of trust.

I don't think the UK's reneging on the GFA would concern the bigger world players like China, Russia and India. None of their governments could afford to act piously about the matter as they all have more than enough dirt on their own hands. Besides, I don't think trustworthiness would enter much into it. When you're at that level of negotiating, leverage and mutual benefit seem like much bigger factors in deciding whether or not to do a deal.

brickster69 wrote: »

They are trying to figure out how they have gone from believing they had the best deal they could of wished for, to one which puts most of the countries into recession.

They do have the best deal, one that has united 27 countries together.

Same cannot be said for the United Kingdom which is anything but.

BluePlanet wrote: »

Regardless of the kite flying and transactional strings attached to John Bolton's appeal for a UK/US trade deal, we also have a statement from a more relevant person in the Trump admin - the US Commerce Secretary, back in 2016 before he was confirmed in the post:

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/27/brexit-is-a-god-given-opportunity-to-steal-trade-from-uk-wilbur-ross.html

I suppose the media could have reminded readers about this, but oh well..

Sparked speculation?

No! Really!? Surely not. Thought these trade deals were going to be all milk and honey and upsides galore for the UK?

The UK should leave now. Why are they still in the EU?

But no, have to be top dog all the time. The more silent the EU is, the better really.

I think EU will survive without them now, and a plague on all their houses. UK even if they stay will never be trusted members ever again now. Just my view.

briany wrote: »

Anyway, let's suppose that the UK flagrantly reneged on the GFA. What would be the consequences, internationally? I mean, I can see that it wouldn't help relations with the EU and Ireland, but those seem to be going downhill either way. What else? International condemnation? Can they be summonsed to legal proceedings in the Hague? Does their credit rating take a blow? Do other countries really care? Would it make them more reticent to cut a deal with the UK?

Someone else might have more information on the potential legal ramifications. Ultimately I don't think there us much that can be done legally to hold a countries feet to the fire if they decide to breach an international agreement. You can probably lodge a dispute with the UN but if they other side decide not to care what the international community has to say about it, there is little else that can be done.

It depends on the country, among mature nations that value a rules based international order, like Japan for example, fragrantly breaching a binding agreement is akin to sh**ing the bed and they would be very wary of doing a deal with such a country.

Countries who do not value the rules, like Albania, probably wont care and will still do a deal if there is some advantage for them. In either case however, you put yourself on the back foot in future deals, you invite your partners to be more agresive with you in negiotations becasue you are a riskier proposition and they can raise that in talks and push for greater concessions to make dealing with you worth the risk.

brickster69 wrote: »

They are trying to figure out how they have gone from believing they had the best deal they could of wished for, to one which puts most of the countries into recession.

Which countries would be put in to recession (aside from the UK)?

Facts, figures and references please.

Also will predict for the next 12 months.

A. EU will cut interest rates into further negative territory
B. Printing presses will start up again to purchase junk bonds no one else will buy
C. Inflation will not fall
D. A Euro bank will be bailed out contrary to EU rules

brickster69 wrote: »

I predicted the WA was dead months ago.:)

Still alive, so you get zilch for that. We'll revisit after October 31st

brickster69 wrote: »

Also predicted Deutche Bank would turn into a zombie bank which could bring the whole pack of cards down.

So you'll be able to quote the post in which you predicted this. Not that I don't believe you or anything... well, actually, you haven't said anything true so far that I've seen.

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Someone else might have more information on the potential legal ramifications. Ultimately I don't think there us much that can be done legally to hold a countries feet to the fire if they decide to breach an international agreement.

The Agreement assumes continuing EU membership for both
the UK and Ireland but binds neither explicitly to maintaining that membership. The 2016 Belfast High Court case outlined in Section 1 ruled that there was nothing in the Good Friday Agreement to prevent the triggering of Article 50.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/583116/IPOL_BRI%282017%29583116_EN.pdf

Damian Hinds was fired as Education secretary a couple of weeks ago by Johnson. He is on record as supporting the backstop

https://www.skygroup.sky/corporate/media-centre/articles/en-gb/Sophy-Ridge-on-Sunday-Interview-with-Damian-Hinds-Education-Sec

I very much doubt this was a mistake given the furore and recriminations under May over people leaving No. 10 showing documents to reporters "files flipping open"

briany wrote: »

It's not Article 50 that's the problem. It's the fact that the UK refuses to implement it in such a way that does not damage the GFA. No soft brexit, no workable technological solutions, and not even a real conversation about the whole issue before the referendum.

Failure to engage with Ireland about it, failure to engage the North South Ministerial Council about it, failure even to work with both factions in NI about it.

Add: Failure to engage the British–Irish Intergovernmental Conference about it.
Particularly since the NI Assembly is not working.

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Sure, that is why Ireland has never argued otherwise. The Irish government never claimed that the UK leaving the EU would breach the GFA. It is HOW the UK leaves the EU that poses a risk to the GFA. As such, the UK can leave the EU without breching the GFA, but must implement the measures outlined in the backstop to do it.

The UK has said it will not put checks on the border, IRE has said the same as well as the EU. So the GFA will not be broken.

What you are saying is checks done away from the border will break the GFA now ?

Anyone that thinks that checks can be made away from the border has obviously never been to said border.

Smuggling is not seen as a crime among border communities, as I know prominent politicians (of both colours!), civil servants and members of HMRC have engaged in smuggling.

Anything can be smuggled. Wherever there is a price differential, someone will exploit it. And to think that checks only on goods will have no effect on the movement of people is naive in the extreme. Sure, passports might not be needed for someone to cross the border, but that’s not much consolation when they’re sat for an hour in a queue.

brickster69 wrote: »

The UK has said it will not put checks on the border, IRE has said the same as well as the EU. So the GFA will not be broken.

What you are saying is checks done away from the border will break the GFA now ?

Any checks at all anywhere would be in breach of the GFA. If there are customs checks even 20 miles from the physical line on the map, that equates to "border infrastructure" and a hard border between the two jurisdictions.

Came back in to find the page number jumped quite today abit only to find it is the same brexiter argument

Meanwhile in the Scottish courts today

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1161259449274765312