For some strange reason I am vaguely encouraged by the outcome of the British general election, and it is not because the numbers turned out to be broadly as I expected they would be. Theresa May must be one of the worst leaders that even the Tories have ever produced, and no amount of repetition of the mindless “Strong and Stable” mantra could hide that fact.
Equally, the DUP did more or less exactly as I expected they would do in Northern Ireland, and they too have, in Arlene Foster, a leader who is pretty much the worst of a dire lot of predecessors, including Ian Paisley, the party founder, himself. But it is not really the choice of leaders which has me basically equanimous at the election outcome.
It could have been better, it could have been worse, but the outcome of the first post-Brexit election was always going to be something truly awful. The level of delusion, lies and deceit Brexit has introduced into the mainstream of the UK body politic was always going to produce a uniquely toxic stew, and now we can put a name on it: Brexit Mania.
The first symptom of this condition is the belief that there can be such a thing as a “good Brexit deal for Britain”. Certainly when compared to the past where the UK was a member, in good standing, of the EU, “a good Brexit deal” can, at best, be an exercise in damage limitation.
The EU, as we know, is no utopia, but even at it’s worst it offers better solutions to the international conflict that Brexit will now inevitably, at least to some extent, unleash. It may be a slow, difficult, and bureaucratically complex process to bring any sort of meaningful change to a conglomerate of 28 nations, but it is better than a process which pits the interests of one member state against the rest.
The EU is, above all, a political construct designed to prevent war breaking out between its member states, and in this it has been extraordinarily successful. Perhaps the worst example of its shortcomings has been in its relatively recent collective mistreatment of Greece, whereby ordinary Greek citizens are made to suffer for the sins of their past political and current financial elites. German banks must remain solvent even if it means misery and premature death for many Greeks.
However the UK did not exactly cover itself in glory in that fiasco either, and then compounded its malfeasance by requiring that Greece bear the vast majority of the refugee crisis burden caused, in large part, by the UK’s own middle eastern policies. That act alone should have made the UK a candidate for expulsion proceedings from the EU, if such a thing were possible. But the fact is that the UK has been a regularly delinquent member of the EU almost since it joined, and the EU’s indulgence has only encouraged it to behave ever worse.
Brexit may therefore become one of the best things ever to happen to the EU, and one of the very worst that could ever happen to a former member state. It could, at a stretch, enable the EU to function much more cohesively and progressively, whilst demonstrating to the UK how far it has fallen down the pecking order of relatively advanced nation states.
Brexiteers have wailed that the EU must not act punitively towards the UK once it has left, but that is not really what it’s all about: it is the duty of EU 27 leaders to act in the best interests of their collective polity – just as the UK elite should have acted in the UK’s best interests. What that means in practice is that the EU will now asset strip the UK of all its EU related economic activities, starting with the City of London and ending with the few remaining British owned strategic businesses in the aerospace, ICT, pharmaceutical and consumer products sectors.
This will have the effect of dramatically reducing the UK’s GDP, employment levels, government revenues, Sterling values and the real disposable incomes of its citizens. Theresa May will have her wish: net immigration will be much reduced, and may even be reversed. But it will not be for any good reason: employment opportunities and incomes will simply be better elsewhere.
Brexiteers have argued that the EU will never allow this to happen because “the EU needs the UK as much as the UK needs the EU”. At some superficial levels this may almost be true, but it is to misunderstand the nature of the beast that has now been disturbed. If EU cohesion requires that collective action be taken – such as the imposition of tariffs on UK exports to the EU – then that action will be taken, even if EU exporters to the UK and many EU owned industries within the UK are damaged or disrupted in the process. Good corporate strategy directors are already preparing plans to mitigate those risks.
And there can be only one winner in any economic battle between the UK and the EU, and it will not be the UK. Indeed the UK will have the same difficulty when it tries to negotiate trade deals with China, India, Russia, Latin America and former colonies. It’s relative economic and political bargaining power will be much diminished. And it had better hurry if its wants to negotiate an advantageous trade deal with Trump’s USA. He may lose control of the Senate and its role in ratifying Trade deals after the next mid-term elections.
All of which brings us to Ireland, the EU’s member state most exposed to the consequences of a very hard Brexit. The EU has recognised the importance of the Good Friday Agreement in securing peace in Northern Ireland with it’s emphasis on guaranteeing the human (and European citizenship) rights of its citizens, and on the role of the Irish Government as co-guarantor of the agreement. Within “an ever closer Union” the distinctions between British and Irish nationalities were going to diminish and enable the development of a more cohesive society there.
Now all of that has been thrown under a bus: Firstly by the Brexit vote (rejected in N. Ireland), and now by the nakedly sectarian and British nationalist nature of the Conservative DUP government likely to come into office. Expect much wailing and gnashing of teeth when Sinn Fein (the other big winners in the N. Ireland elections) refuse to reactivate the Stormont devolved institutions unless it receives guarantees there will be no hard customs border with the south.
That can only happen if the UK remains within the EU Customs Union (like Turkey) or if the Customs border is moved into the Irish Sea – effectively retaining N. Ireland within the Customs Union – which will become extremely problematic for the DUP especially if tariffs are imposed post Brexit. Most of N. Ireland’s trade is still with Great Britain, and any border between N. Ireland and GB will be absolute anathema to the DUP.
The official position now will of course be that a post Brexit EU UK trade deal will obviate the need for any such controls or tariffs, but that is purely wishful thinking at this stage. As things stand, May’s insistence on leaving the Single Market (the UK’s one major contribution to the EU) and the Customs Union cannot but mean a hard (and unenforcible) border across 500 km of what was previously bandit country at the time of the Troubles. A smuggler’s paradise.
So why my guarded optimism? Firstly, if you expect Brexit to be an utter disaster, it helps if the two most reactionary major parties in Britain and N. Ireland are seen to be directly responsible. With the next general election not due to happen until three years after Brexit, the Conservatives and DUP will not be able to evade the electoral retribution coming to those who wreck such havoc upon their people. Labour the SNP and Sinn Fein will likely be the next majority parties in the UK, Scotland and N. Ireland respectively.
This cannot but bring the prospect for Scottish Independence and Irish unification (in some shape or form) somewhat closer. While both of these developments would be problematic projects in their own right, at least the political classes would be directed towards addressing problems that cannot be addressed in a London centric polity, especially in a declining post imperial and post European state.
Many on the left have argued that a DUP Conservative government cannot last that long. This may well be the case given the exigencies of politics, but it also ignores the fact that they are a natural fit: xenophobic, racist, sectarian, (and for the most part) homophobic and sexist – lead by two leaders of a like mind and competence. If they fall the whole Brexit project may yet collapse; but if they succeed Scottish independence and Irish Unity will be several steps closer – the very opposite to what they proclaim to believe.
The Coalition of Chaos (Labour, SNP, Lib Dem, Plaid Cymru and Greens) may have beaten the Brexiteers (Conservatives plus DUP) by 53% of the vote to 43%. But it is the latter which still hold the political whip hand. It will take more than a few bye-election losses to shift them, and that could take much longer than the fast elapsing A50 negotiating period.
My central expectation is still a hard Brexit with either no or no substantial Brexit deal at all, followed by the imposition of tariffs and a rapid deterioration of economic and political relationships. Northern Ireland will be in the eye of the storm as the winds of change released by Brexit mania play themselves out. Let us hope that not too many people will be hurt or killed in the meantime.
Delusionary politics can have very real consequences, and they are generally not for the better. It is the task of a more progressive politics to mitigate the harm and reduce the costs of transition, painful as they may well be. Either way the EU, the UK and Ireland will never be the same again.
I heard some ‘talking head’ say that there may be legal problems with a DUP-Torie government because it would violate The Good Friday Agreement.
Not knowing enough about the ins&outs of the regional politics, I thought I’d ask if you knew anything about what said talking head could mean? And if it is against the agreement, does the agreement hold legally binding sway so that the coalition could be challenged in court?
There is nothing in the Good Friday Agreement to prevent the DUP supporting a Conservative government, and indeed it has often doe so, if more informally, in the past.
There is however an argument, which I have made here, that the manner in which Brexit is being implemented is in breach of the good Friday Agreement, which is justiciable in the ICJ. Sadly, the Irish Government has not responded to my request that it challenges the UK government’s approach to Brexit before the court.
Okay. Very interesting. Given the very rigid governmental system in the US, the British system seems very much like a make-it-up-as-you-go system because even the very few things that are written down don’t hold all that much sway if you can get half plus one of Parliament to vote for it.
It makes it at least appear hard to know what actually can be used to successfully challenge things in court.
Thank you for the reply Frank!
Thanks for this Frank. Regarding the longevity of a Conservative-DUP agreement, I would say that for all the overlap between the DUP and the Conservative Party at its nastiest, traditional English Toryism doesn’t get its morality from Protestant fundamentalism and there’s an element of the party that is going to be VERY discomfited if the new govt starts sounding like the DUP when it talks about The Gays, etc. Seeing as May called the election because she couldn’t be sure of holding together her own party when she had a majority of 17, it’s very difficult to see how a ConDUP govt is going to function now that she can’t afford to lose any of those “Wets” at all.
Second, a little bit of optimism is definitely called for. Since the Thatcher-Reagan era, British politics have proceeded within the small govt, free market, privatizing parameters of Thatcherism, to which she insisted There Is No Alternative. A whole generation of British voters has grown up with a Labour Party that seemed to have internalized that message and saw its role as to mitigate the worst excesses of conservatism rather than providing an alternative to it, resulting in the ever-rightward shift of the political spectrum and a working class that felt abandoned by the party it once identified with (Lesson for the Democrats there too, I think). But now, we have a Labour Party that is saying all those things that became unmentionable, like nationalisation, and social housing – all those things that have been beyond the pale for so long that anyone who even mentioned them was called hopelessly naive and peripheral. It actually feels like, finally, an end to the Thatcher era and the stranglehold it’s had on us, and regardless of all the chaos that awaits, that itself is a very happy feeling.
I don’t think the DUP will attempt to impose its homophobic, fundamentalist views on the Tory Government in Britain – it’s focus will be very much on what happens in N. Ireland, and most Tories, frankly, don’t give a damn what happens in N. Ireland. So the DUP won’t be that big a problem for May.
But you are correct, it is anything but clear that May could get Parliamentary approval for any Brexit deal she might be able to negotiate – assuming she is able to negotiate one at all. However if no Brexit deal is negotiated or approved by Parliament, the UK is out of the EU end March 2019 in any case – with absolutely no deal – what is often referred to as a “falling off a cliff Brexit”.
It is the likelihood of that happening that makes me such a pessimist about Brexit in general.
Yes Corbyn has completely revitalised the Labour party as a genuine left wing alternative. Unfortunately, if Brexit is the disaster I expect, the UK will never have the money to implement the much needed changes he proposes.
So do you think there will be any ‘wash off’ effect from being so close to people so batshit insane or are UK voters for the most part over that kind of thing after the UKIP slime getting all over the Tories on the regular?
As in the USA, the Overton window in the UK had been moving steadily to the right. Corbyn’s near victory is the first sign that there is a limit to how far that process can go. However I would expect any Tory lead government to dial the xenophobia factor to 11 as the Brexit talks repeatedly get nowhere and ultimately result in a very “unsatisfactory agreement” if they result in an agreement at all. The Brexit Mania fever has not yet broken and many otherwise very smart people are living in cloud cuckoo land.
A really fundamental problem is that May can’t get effective limits on immigration without checkpoints, and the DUP doesn’t want checkpoints on the Irish border and goes ballistic at any separation of NI and the rest of the UK (like border checkpoints between them.) But the UKIPers did all this to keep out immigrant, and there are a lot of hard Brexiters in her MPs. A soft Brexit, with major hits to the City but no limits on immigration, is their worst possible scenario.
I don’t see how she can even negotiate in this situation. Any proposal for Brexit, whether hard or soft, and she loses her majority.
“And there can be only one winner in any economic battle between the UK and the EU”
Actually I think it is pretty clear that there will be no winner.
As I have said here before, I am short the pound versus the Euro, and went long on the Euro against the Dollar before the first round of voting in France.
But Europe has plenty of problems of its own, and they aren’t getting better.
Like clockwork Survation, the best pollster in the most recent election drops the hammer on the Tories:
In the same poll Corbyn ties May for best to serve as PM, and by 49-38 people want May out.
The Tories are screwed. They are going to have to make the coalition work, because if they don’t another election will bring Labour in. Polly Toynbee noted there are 28 seats with less than a 2 K Conservative margin.
But when push comes to shove can they get a compromise Brexit Bill though? There are more than enough Conservatives who will vote against a Hard Brexit, and if Labour finds justification to oppose it, and they almost certainly will, how do the conservatives survive the vote.
THe SNP, who is re-enacting the trajectory of the Parti Quebecois almost to the day (minus 20 years), appear close to collapse. Seriously: the PQ narrowly lost their referendum in ’95, and began a long slow fade soon after.
Corbyn really does give hope: this was a pretty clear stand against the forces of austerity.
As EU leaders have made clear, Brexit is a sad day for the Union and for Europe in general. In that sense there are no winners, and we are talking about damage limitation. But in relative terms, I believe the EU will come out of this very much better than the UK.
Without Brexit, you might have been right about the SNP and Parti Quebecois. However if Brexit is the disaster I expect, the SNP will be given a new lease of life.
Yes, the Tories will have difficulty getting any Brexit deal through parliament, which is why I expect a “falling of a cliff Brexit” with no Brexit deal whatsoever – or at best a very cut down limited one.
Thanks for this worthwhile analysis, Frank. I’m glad you find reason for optimism in the dreck. I find myself in a similar place re. U.S. politics and policies. It’s hard to live through these painful times, though.
The DUP’s conditions change the dynamics of the negotiations, because they’ve said a hard Brexit is unacceptable. That also means no deal is unacceptable as well. So if the EU wishes, they can offer an EFTA-style “associate membership” status – open borders and Britain following all EU rules, but having no say in setting those rules – and May will have to do her best to accept. Obviously the EU can just not offer a deal and she has no choice but to “accept” that as well. So the EU totally has the whip hand now and can write pretty much any deal it wants.
My bet at this point is an “associate membership” offer, to minimize disruption, but with no special considerations for the City, to deliver the punishment. It will at least be entertaining to watch the Tories thrash about when that or hard Brexit and the collapse of their government are the alternatives.
I think the DUP’s focus will be on maximising the benefits for N. Ireland, and May’s focus will be on limiting any concessions to N. Ireland – thus I doubt she will U-turn on the Single market and Custom’s Union for the UK as a whole. The trick will be in agreeing special arrangements for N. Ireland without triggering the DUP’s paranoia about creating any barriers between N. Ireland and GB.
A DUP-Tory alliance could make unionism unacceptable
Despite Newton Emerson’s argument that Sinn Fein needs to get back into a devolved Government in Belfast, I remain unconvinced they will be in any hurry to do so, unless they can use it to swing very significant concessions from the DUP/Conservative Government on welfare cuts, support for Irish language initiatives, and above all on Brexit: No hard border with the South.
How May squares that circle will be interesting. Either she has to reverse course on the Single market and the Customs Union, or she has to negotiate some kind of special status for N. Ireland – something the DUP have said they are against.
However, if the EU were agreeable to N. Ireland becoming some kind of free trade zone between the UK and the EU, a very advantageous Brexit deal for N. Ireland might be possible. The problem would be to prevent N. Ireland becoming a smuggler’s channel bypassing any Tariffs that might arise between the EU/UK. A system of customs pre-clearance and customs Certificates of Origin might just be feasible given good will on all sides and might be acceptable to all if Tariffs were seen as a temporary necessity pending the agreement of a more comprehensive free trade deal.
Temporary arrangements have a way of becoming permanent however, and the EU might well be wary of such an arrangement. The Irish Government would be an enthusiastic backer, however, and could threaten to veto any post Brexit deal requiring unanimity unless a way is found around the hard border issue.
A hard border would destabilise the Irish Government as well as the Northern peace process, so a perhaps surprising congruence of interests between the British and Irish governments, Sinn Fein and the DUP could emerge. There are other similar anomalies within the EU in small territories such as Andorra, Gibraltar, Jersey, and Lichtenstein. The question is, is N. Ireland small enough not to matter too much in the grand scheme of things?
We are a long way from any such agreement just yet, but I could see it becoming viable as the end game approached and it made all the difference between a post Brexit deal being agreed or not.
Watch this space.
BREAKING NEWS!
See my earlier diary …
○ PM May On Life Support – NI DUP Agreement