@Walter Hinteler,
That's really irresponsible, and the consequences of her baseless finger-pointing go beyond Brexit. You have countries like Russia which really do meddle in others' politics. She has cried wolf and put Brussels in that category. Now when she calls Russia out justifiably on foul play, fewer people will take her seriously.
@Kolyo,
I'm from the US, and lordy knows we have our own troubles stacking up into bilious cloud formations.
I usually read the Brexit thread, being interested in the first place, and secondly, to learn. I'm no fan of May, however much some like her, and I'm sorry for what from here seems to be a poor performance by labour. Not entirely unlike the US democrats.
Why am I posting? to thank you all for keeping posting: please continue.
Theresa May’s Brexit Britain can no longer be considered a serious country
By Joris Luyendijk, The Guardian, Friday 5 May 2017
As the UK’s delusions and denial continue, continental Europeans are rethinking all those stereotypes about a liberal island set in a sea of reason and pragmatism.
For many years now the logo “Keep calm and carry on” has been a huge hit across Europe. You can find it on posters, T-shirts and mugs – both the original text as distributed in 1939, to steel the British people for the war to come, as well as many “funny” variations. The slogan’s popularity is easy to understand as it unites the most important positive stereotypes about Britain in Europe: a pragmatic and liberal island people who were on the right side in second world war.
Yet as the government of Theresa May and its cheerleaders in the billionaire-owned press continue their illogical, ignorant and deluded promises and accusations over Brexit, it is time for Europeans to reconsider this idea of the British – or, to be more accurate, of the English.
For over a year now, virtually all signs coming out of London suggest that Europeans are not just bidding farewell to an EU member state. They must also come to grips with a future in which their neighbours across the Channel and the North Sea are no longer predictable or rational.
Britain’s reputation for reliability is simply not reconcilable with the presence of Boris Johnson in the cabinet. The country’s reputation for stable government cannot be squared with the impending Brexit-induced chaos and upheaval in Scotland and Northern Ireland. With every new round of applause from Viktor Orbán in Hungary, Marine Le Pen in France and Donald Trump, Britain’s image as one of “the good guys” in the global fight for liberal values looks more obsolete.
And then there is Theresa May herself. Her claim this week that the EU is trying to influence the elections in Britain through a leak to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung is the latest example of a long list of statements that simply make no sense. Britain is not the centre of the world, and the idea that EU leaders would sit together plotting a victory for Jeremy Corbyn is laughable.
Far more likely is that EU leaders decided to leak the proceedings of their dinner on Sunday with May in order to warn their own public about how irrational Britain has become. How the country believes itself to have the upper hand in a negotiation with a group of nations seven times its own size. How it wants to be part of the single market while refusing to recognise the authority of the European court governing that market. And, most alarmingly, how badly informed May still is about the practical consequences both of Brexit and of a no-deal crash out of the EU.
Perhaps other Europeans have never looked closely enough at the English. The fact is that millions of the English still believe what they have been told by the Brexiteers: that they can have the benefits of EU membership without its obligations.
If May were a stateswoman, she would now be preparing her own people for the very painful sacrifices ahead. Instead she prefers to indulge in the fantasy that Britain is still a world power capable of dictating its terms to other countries. Even worse, she is doing nothing to bring Brexit-sceptics – the 48% – back into the national conversation, preferring instead to let the tabloids engage in their intimidation and character assassination.
The British writer Martin Amis once wrote that his country had responded to the loss of empire by “embracing frivolity”. This is a beautiful and rather kind understatement to characterise the almost casual way in which Great Britain organised its EU referendum, how it waged the campaign, and how it has acted in the 10 months since.
As painful as it is for all those in Europe who loved the Britain they thought they knew, there is no escaping it: under the leadership of Theresa May the United Kingdom can no longer be considered a serious country.
By the extraordinary efforts being made to terrify/pacify the rest of the startled herd, it would appear that the massive cash cow has almost made it to the open gate.
@Olivier5,
I think it a bit pretentious and foolishly self-important for the editorial writer you quoted here to announce that the UK is no longer a serious country presumably because of it's pending withdrawal from the EU. A similar withdrawal is a part of the ongoing political debate in France as well. Is France, as well, in danger of becoming an unserious country?
On the face of it Brexit will restore full national sovereignty to the UK and remove the yoke of the EU bureaucracy & courts from its domestic policies. It is hard to conceive of that as a loss of significance in world or domestic affairs.
The EU faces a number of serious internal and external challenges right now, and, despite the spectacular success it has achieved over the past few decades, its continued success will require serious self-examination and perhaps reform to deal with both changed external conditions, and the accumulated side effects of so far successful programs. My opinion is that these deserve some of the attention of those now focused on bashing the British for their decision. The North-South economic divide; lingering East West cultural differences and the complex overlay of treaty requirements and national participation in currency management, border controls and other issues all appear to need attention. Bureaucracies thrive on such arcane complexity, but little else does, and that is a problem.
@georgeob1,
The point is not that Brexit makes the Brits look frivolous per se. It is that the Brexit referendum campaign and subsequent political developments are dominated by passions, rather than by rational arguments. And thus the article argues Europe should also be saying goodbye to its fantasy or illusion that the Brits are more thoughtful and pragmatic than most in their politics. It turns out they are just as irrational and emotive as any Greek, French or Portuguese out there; just as unstable as any Pole or Hungarian; and just as likely to shoot themselves in the foot as the Zimbabweans or the Americans. In short, the UK is a perfectly normal country.
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:On the face of it Brexit will restore full national sovereignty to the UK and remove the yoke of the EU bureaucracy & courts from its domestic policies.
Just to remember; the UK joined voluntarily.
What do you mean with "the courts"? There's the
Court of Justice of the European Union, tasked with interpreting EU law and not domestic policies.
(If you were referring to the
European Court of Human Rights - that's a court within the context of the Council of Europe [47 member states].)
@Walter Hinteler,
I made no claim about any supposed forced entry in the EU. The UK always appeared a bit ambiguous about the "ever closer union" aspect of the EU, and memories of the Commonwealth and the now departed sterling zone clearly distracted it in the early years after WWII, however their choices to enter were voluntary, just as was their choice to leave.
Hard to know just what is your point here.
@Olivier5,
My studies in macro-economics tells me brexit is not a good move.
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:I made no claim about any supposed forced entry in the EU. The UK always appeared a bit ambiguous about the "ever closer union" aspect of the EU, and memories of the Commonwealth and the now departed sterling zone clearly distracted it in the early years after WWII, however their choices to enter were voluntary, just as was their choice to leave.
Hard to know just what is your point here.
Well, I was just referring to
[quote"you wrote"] Brexit will restore full national sovereignty to the UK and remove the yoke of the EU bureaucracy & courts [/quote]
Sir Crispin Tickell, after participating in the negotiations that led to the UK’s accession to the EEC, became chef de cabinet to the president of the European Commission, and later British ambassador to the UN. He gave his memories about how Britain negotiated its entry to the EEC
>here<.
The Court of Justice of the European Union [that's the only court for EU (EEC) affairs] exists under various names since more than 60 years = already well established when the UK joined the EEC.
@cicerone imposter,
I wouldn't know, never understood macro-economics much.
@Olivier5,
Simply put, the larger the free market area, the more competition and better for all concerned.
It's interesting to note that manufacturing has been returning to the US of late after years of offshoring for several decades.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/manufacturing-in-america/
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
It turns out they are just as irrational and emotive as any Greek, French or Portuguese out there; just as unstable as any Pole or Hungarian;
Very true. It isn't the character of Poles or Hungarians or Russians that has those countries where they are. What happened there could happen anywhere. Moreover, Britain's first-past-the-post parliamentary seats pose a danger that Germany is clear of. UKIP only needs 30% to win a seat.
@Kolyo,
A few passages from the report
Brexit and energy: does ‘taking back control’ mean losing powe:
Quote:The Brexit spotlight swung last week away from the familiar cast of bankers quitting the City and coffee-shop chains worried about recruiting staff to the fate of the energy industry tasked with powering the economy when the UK leaves the EU.
The loudest warnings came from MPs, peers, engineers and the industry itself over the impact that blocks to trade or freedom of movement would have on the nuclear and oil sectors.
However, the UK’s departure from the union also risks damaging urgent efforts to make the continent’s energy systems greener and more efficient, an adviser to the head of the United Nations has told the Observer.
[...]
At least eight cables are being laid under the sea or through the Channel Tunnel to trade power between the UK, Ireland, France, Belgium, Denmark and Norway, tripling the existing number of UK interconnectors. Billions of pounds are committed to the projects under way, and ones even further afield have been mooted, such as a cable to bring Iceland’s volcanic power to the UK.
The government hopes these interconnectors will continue to operate post-Brexit, and wants more beyond those planned already.
[...]
Key to the future prospects for interconnectors will be whether the UK continues as a member of the EU internal energy market, in a similar fashion to Norway. Alternatives include tracking the EU regime without any formal arrangement, or striking a series of bilateral arrangements similar to those Switzerland has made with the bloc.
[...]
The nuclear industry potentially stands to lose the most from leaving the EU. Buried in the small print of Theresa May’s Brexit bill in January was the news that Britain would quit a vital atomic power treaty: Euratom, which underpins the transport of nuclear fuel and other materials across Europe.
[...]
Britain quitting the treaty has also raised doubts over the future of its involvement in research and development on nuclear fusion, a cleaner form of atomic power. The Joint European Torus (JET), a fusion research project at Culham in Oxfordshire, receives £50m a year from Euratom. But the current contract runs out in 2018, halfway through Brexit talks.
[...]
The government has given no hints on whether it will retain membership of the EU’s flagship climate change regime, the Emissions Trading System. The carbon market currently costs industries such as oil, cement, and steel just under €5 per tonne of carbon they emit. The oil and gas industry are among the sectors seeking clarity on whether the UK will stay or go.
Some experts think the market’s links to EU institutions may mean an exit is inevitable. ... ... ...
[...]
The big post-EU concern for the UK’s ailing oil and gas industry is the prospect of new tariffs being imposed.
Industry body Oil & Gas UK warned last week that a hard Brexit, falling back on World Trade Organisation rules, would see trading costs almost double from £600m a year to £1.1bn because of changing tariff rates. At best, trading costs might go down £100m if the UK can strike more favourable deals outside the UK.
... ... ...
@Walter Hinteler,
Graffiti artist Banksy has left an enigmatic comment on Brexit with a huge new piece in Dover. The mural, which shows a man chipping off one of the gold stars on the EU flag, appeared overnight on Saturday.
BBC makes an interesting, counter-intuitive point.
Quote:The received wisdom is that the election of Emmanuel Macron as president of France is bad for Britain's Brexit negotiations. Like much received wisdom, it may just be wrong. [...]
The election of Macron may just make the EU a little more confident or perhaps a little less defensive. Many in the EU will conclude - maybe over-optimistically - that the global populist surge has now peaked with Trump and Brexit.
The electoral failure of anti-establishment politicians in Austria, the Netherlands and now France will give them hope that the troubled EU project is not quite so threatened as they had imagined.
They may feel a little less fearful that Brexit could presage the breakup of the EU. And a less vulnerable EU may feel less determined to make an example of Britain in the negotiations. And that can only be good for Brexit, however hard or soft you want it.
So the election of President Macron will of course send shivers of relief through the corridors of Brussels. But it won't make the challenge of Brexit any more enormous than it already is.
@Olivier5,
Thanks, yes. I'm naturally relieved myself, but only lightly.
Storms are oncoming.
Not least by our fake hair president, whom I consider as globally dangerous, possibly by mistake or, more likely, standing up for his ego.
@Olivier5,
If nothing else, I'm sure Theresa May is relieved she won't have to
speak to Marine Le Pen.
She's also probably glad she won't be advised again to give Nigel Farage an ambassadorship, to France this time.
