I seldom comment on Brexit, largely because I neither see leaving the EU as a panacea nor the EU itself as a Utopia, and am alienated by the over-extravagant passions and claims on both sides. In addition to that, the FCO is largely excluded from Brexit negotiations, being perceived by the Tories as a nest of remainers, so I seldom get any interesting information fed to me by ex-colleagues.
I should admit at this point that my apparently effortless expertise on myriad subjects is something of a fake, because often posts are prompted and informed (and very rarely, even written) by someone on the inside, and sometimes it is not possible to tell you that. But sometimes I can tell you, and today this knowledge comes from the inside.
The Legal Advisers of the FCO remain the UK government’s source of expertise on public international law. When the Attorney General publishes his view on such a matter, it has been drafted by FCO Legal Advisers or at the least is based on a minute from them. The sole exception to this of which I know was when Blair’s Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, received formal advice from FCO Legal Advisers that to invade Iraq would be an illegal war of aggression. Goldsmith then flew to Washington on instruction from Blair and Goldsmith’s final advice that the war was legal was based on drafting, not from FCO Legal Advisers, but from George Bush’s Legal Advisors. That is one of those incredible facts that I often find hard to understand do not lead to active public outrage. I wish I was a more religious man and could be sure that Hell awaits Goldsmith. I comfort myself with the thought that Goldsmith might himself be religious and cowering.
There is currently considerable alarm in the FCO that Legal Advisers have been asked about the circumstances constituting force majeure which would justify the UK in breaking a EU Withdrawal Agreement in the future. The EU did not fall for Johnson’s idea that a form of Northern Irish “backstop” would only come into effect with the future sanction of Stormont, as this effectively gives a hardline unionist veto, and Barnier was not born yesterday. The situation that Johnson and Raab appear now to contemplate is agreeing a “backstop” now to get Brexit done, but then not implementing the agreed backstop when the time comes due to “force majeure”.
There are two major problems with this line of thinking. The first is that it will give unionists an incentive to foment disorder in order to justify breaking the backstop agreement – indeed there is a concern that might be the tacit understanding Johnson is reaching with the DUP. Remember the British state conspired with the same people to murder the lawyer Pat Finucane and destroyed the evidence as recently as 2002.
The second problem is one of bad faith negotiation, and this is what is troubling the diplomats of the FCO. To negotiate an agreement with the secret intention of breaking it in future is a grossly immoral proceeding, and undermines the whole principle of good international relations. I should like to be able to say that I am sure this cannot be the intention. But when I look at Johnson, Raab and Cummings, I am really not so sure at all. It is possible that Johnson will succeed in the apparently insurmountable challenge of securing a deal all parties can agree, by the simple strategy of promising some parties he has no intention of honouring it.
——————————————
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
IF YOU LIVE IN THE UK, PLEASE SIGN MY PETITION FOR OFFICIAL INTERNATIONAL OSCE OBSERVERS FOR THE NEXT SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM
Dominic Cummings, presently a powerful and wealthy 47-year old special advisor to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, was hard at work in Moscow and Samara for three years, between 1994 and 1997. He has acknowledged himself that “I worked in Russia 1994-7 on various projects.” This was no news to the Russian authorities then or since; it is also an advertisement to British critics and media investigators in London that however much Cummings’ role in plotting the Brexit referendum and Johnson’s no-deal ultimatums have antagonized many, Cummings once, and still now, enjoys the protection and confidence of the British secret services.
The three Cummings years in Russia were a period of fierce undercover combat between MI6, the British foreign intelligence agency, and Russia’s reviving foreign and counter-intelligence services, successors to the Soviet KGB — the SVR (Foreign Intelligence Service), led by Yevgeny Primakov, and the FSB (Federal Security Service) under Sergei Stepashin and Mikhail Barsukov.
http://johnhelmer.net/is-dominic-cummings-a-sleeper-russian-agent-the-british-prime-ministers-mind-control-experts-secret-years-in-kgb-moscow/
Wasn’t John Helmer accused of working for the KGB?
I think, he is a CIA asset, currently a sleeper in the USSR, having aided US President Jimmy Carter.
Thanks for this link. So Christopher Steele was in Samara, although he’d left (with an FSB bootmark on his crapper) by the time Cummings appeared on the block.
Cummings’s academically-supported line that sophisticated data ops don’t matter in elections – apparently they matter only in referendums – is hilarious and I’ll be taking a closer look at the academic who’s spouting that.
As well as being the time of the expulsions of British spies from Russia, the early 1990s were also the period when “Iaponchik” busted “Globus” Glugech in the world of Russian and Russian-linked organised crime. Interested people should look those names up. The city of Vienna features in that story. It’s likely that Cummings was indeed involved in running drugs out of Russia to that city.
Cummings would certainly have been mafia protected. Even in the 1980s the mafia had a lot of influence at civilian airports in the USSR, up to and including Sheremetevo. Did nightclub boy leave Russia in a hurry? That info doesn’t appear to be out.
Cummings has certainly got it coming to him. He’s not brilliant, but he’s bright enough to know that that is true. I would say that the probability of him being where he is now in six months’ time is almost zero. I doubt he trusts anyone, and with his organised-crime gangland background he will know that allegiances change. You’re in an especially precarious position if everybody thinks you’re a c***. If he runs to a foreign country it will be interesting to hear which one.
Who was Cummings’s maths tutor, by the way? And yes he did have one. He boasts of having worked with Old Etonian mathematician Timothy Gowers (Trinity College, Cambridge) on a “maths for the elite” programme when he was at the DFE. (Official name was “Maths for Presidents” or similar.) Gowers is the moron who argued that clever people all knew the Alternative Vote system was objectively better than First Past the Post.
To be clear: Cummings has said he had a maths tutor, and he has said he worked with Gowers. He hasn’t said Gowers was his tutor. I have a shortlist of two for who it might have been.
“Negotiating in bad faith” is a pretty strong allegation but describes perfectly the approach taken since June 2016 by the EU & their in house/ in thrall supporters.
Do you think the poshboy regime has any supporters in house or in thrall, @djm?
I despair. I am embarrassed to be British – but then I would be equally embarrassed to be anything else since the Globalist Establishment cookie-cutter promotes only the eminently corrupt, as it ever was. Sigh. Joined XR – see you on the barricades.
Have you given them money? Please don’t. XR are a Steinerite cult front. They believe a “root race” will survive the cataclysm, as they believe happened at the time of “Atlantis”. Their “opposition” amounts to saying “Faster please”, in the manner of Michael Ledeen. Some of them have even said in public that it’s not so bad if their street events cause hassle to (working class) people getting health treatment in (NHS) hospitals (having travelled there by public transport), because “we’re running out of time”. Wake up and smell the coffee, Jared. Have a look at at Triodos Bank if you’ve got the time.
Its the spooky designer logo … it creeps me out.
“I am embarrassed to be British”
But not yet ashamed to be British?
Is a withdrawal agreement necessary any way? The beauty of not having one is that the Irish border can then be exploited to the max and a long-term trading deal (the main objective) reached afterwards.
In one post you claim not to support the EU and it’s fascist tendencies, in the next you criticise Boris again for attempting to get us out of it. The EU persistantly and constantly negotiate intending to break agreements and further their fascist agenda yet Boris is terrible for doing a milder version? Which is it? EU good or bad?
Plainly subtlety is beyond you. So either the EU is evil and Boris Johnson good, or vice versa? Grow up.
Craig, are you familiar with the work of Keith Alan?
The threat of orange disorder/ terror was also a fundamental British justification for their anti-democratic partition of Ireland a century ago: a decision that has returned to haunt the British government and perhaps even thwart Johnson and Cummings and their predatory donors. Ironic too if a hard DUP Brexit ends up sweeping away the little sectarian statelet altogether.
I share your strong dislike of the DUP and Protestant sectarianism. What path do you see towards the result you mention in your last sentence? Referendums with pro-reunification outcomes on both sides of the border, upon which the DUP say “okay then”?
Vox pops with youngsters who say to the microphones “I voted DUP like the whole of my family did, but rather than a hard border I’d support a united Ireland” don’t cut it.
The NHS (if it’s still around) could win it for “No” to reunification in the 6C, and it’s quite possible that “not having the Dail stunk up with scores of Northern Calvinists” would win it for “No” in the 26C too.
“Surrender” is these loonies’ word.
By Force Majeure I assume you mean the reawakening of the civil war between the north and the south of Ireland that will surely follow the implementation of a hard border. It is hardly an unforeseen consequence that will affect any Brexit agreement if it is practically inevitable, and if it is inevitable then it can hardly be called unforeseen. Therefore, as you say, it is not Force Majeure.
No amount of tinkering with the language will give us a conceptual border somewhere other than where it is. If people want Brexit then they must recognise that the time has come to set Northern Ireland free to go its own way, to unite with the south or become a separate entity, whatever that might mean. Brexit means freeing Northern Ireland from the Union.
“Force majeure” has more than one translation.
Force, meaning power or strength.
Majeure, meaning major or most important.
It’s one of those terms that used to confuse me when I studied international relations.
Actually i just googled, here you go;
1.
LAW
unforeseeable circumstances that prevent someone from fulfilling a contract.
2.
irresistible compulsion or superior strength.
Except there isn’t going to be a hard border. It is specifically proscribed by Irish, UK and EU law as a consequence of the Good Friday Agreement. That’s why the EU is so exercised about it. No-one else cares.
Nice of you to channel Johnson, Cummings, Raab etc in completely ignoring all the border communities – they care, you don’t.
???
I suggest you read that comment again ans see how your comment is a non sequitur ish retort.
“If people want Brexit then they must recognise that the time has come to set Northern Ireland free to go its own way, to unite with the south or become a separate entity, whatever that might mean.”
This sounds like another fine example of Anglo-British incomprehension of Northern Ireland, how it came into being, and what either half of the population wants or certainly does not want. (If there really was a serious Northern Irish autonomy movement, what chances of survival would you give it?)
Or to put it another way, for NI to be removed from the provisions of the single market and customs union would be unlawful under the Good Friday Agreement.
As I said in another comment, there are 3 big conditions for reunification: 2 referendums say Yes, and the Calvinist loons accept the message.
Rest assured, the EU and Ireland will not fall for any vulgar British tricks. And it doesn’t make sense for Britain to renege on a deal with the intention of breaking it when so much for Britain hinges on the trade negotiations and good relations later on.
I’m poised to put a bet on the outcome of Brexit. I won quite a lot on trump (around £50 at 8 to 1). And I also won on the EU Vote but I forget how much. I’m betting on a “no deal” crash out.
If I could, I would bet on the EU denying a further extension — let Britain revoke article 50 if it needs more time to think.
I still think that “no deal” is the game plan. These latest overtures of changing the tune on the Ireland/NI border/customs issue are a smoke screen. He wants this to look like a brokered deal and get it through Parliament. If Parliament votes for it, the Benn Act is void and all Boris and Co need to do is to stall legislation to implement the deal and out you go with no deal on the 31st.
I bet on Trump too and now I’m betting on a deal,
(a crap one)
Let us see what US politicians really make of the UK’s moves to ditch the GFA in Ireland, whether they will make its retention and adherence to it pivotal to trading/subject us to substandard goods and services as promised to A.B.de P.Johnson.
bad faith negotiations are happening all over the world, the Korea’s visa vis Japan. Rejecting safety for Kurds, when it was clearly pledged, the ignorance shown by the EU when it comes to safeguarding their top down appointed ‘integrity’ of the Eu visa vis Spanish rejection of a right to self determination.
I fear that Brexit will be used as a ruse to fleece the public some more and when the Tories get their slow privatisation of the NHS plans through, as a minority Government wooing the private interests of some opposition members to side with them, we will get to know what uncle Sam really desires.
I feel that the Irish are being hung out to dry and wished that Scotland and Wales would pledge some support for Irish integrity and the GFA. Irish unity, or the slow deterioration of relations due to a regress into past violence directed by the unionist paramilitaries, events will make it crystal clear what the Irish people desire.
Maybe a Gaelic Alliance rejecting all nationalist tendencies will find some support now that it is known how betrayed the crumbling union has become.
thanks for taking a stance, finally.
Thanks for that;maybe you can help an old man. Why are the Unionists “paramilitareis” , while the IRA are “terrorists”?
One definition of paramilitary is a military grouping connected with and helping the official armed forces. However I don’t know whether that helps.
There is a wealth of vocabulary to choose from, on the one side rebels, insurgents, murder gangs, death squads and so on depending on taste and inclination. The helpful B-Specials and the UVF were more Loyalist than Unionist, whatever that may have meant. The flip side of the number one hit single that is Brexit.
Conducting bad faith negotiations to achieve a Withdrawal agreement seems par for the course. The gain is a transition period (14 months according to Johnson) during which the Political agreement is hashed out and the meat is put on the bones.
Very early into the transition period, the outcome of the GE would determine the bandwidth of the final arrangement. If Johnson can obtain a working majority for the Tories, the DUP are an irrelevance and their objections to NI being in a technical Customs union with the EU can go unheeded.
As for the current play being a unique example of Johnson acting in bad faith which will for ever more poison the well during international negotiations, I think the ship sailed on that point some time ago.
This is fascinating, and equally alarming, although utterly congruent with everything Johnson and Cummings have done so far. It doesn’t surprise me at all, and is very consistent with the attitude that Johnson takes to most things – slapdash, reckless, with a disregard for either the consequences or any responsibility for them. Even in the short time he has been the unelected mandate-less PM, he has reneged on most things he has said or promised. Politicians often change course under the pressure of events, but he has taken this to an unprecedented level of blithe disregard for the most basic of truth or veracity. He just doesn’t care what he says today, as long as he can get his way, he can change it all next week, and bluster away, refuse to answer questions, avoid any serious scrutiny and carry on as if nothing had happened. We know Cummings is an arch manipulator, fantasist and sneering, arrogant egotist. We know Bannon, one of Johnson’s advisers, is intent on wrecking the EU and fomenting alt-right movements in the UK and the US.
They will do this whatever the cost, whatever the string of broken promises, the false statements, the fooling of the system – parliament and the voters. One party got away with it in the 1930’s, they have no qualms about doing it again, using the weaknesses of our antique constitution against it, exploiting it for all their worth, with the able help of 80% of the British media. This was never about brexit, brexit is a proxy for a far wider project, with greater malignancy and worse consequences. Bannon is quite open about it, their networks have slowly been exposed, their adept use and exploitation of social media uncovered, but the so-called political commentators have largely ignored it, preferring to kid themselves that we still have some semblance of a functioning liberal democracy. That is why Bannon, Mogg, Cummings and Johnson laugh at the feeble opposition to them – most of them don’t get the extent of the movement, the hedge-funded power behind the bumbling idiots who cover for them – Johnson being the most egregious example. Breaking treaties, ignoring the law, doing what they want – all of that comes easily and without mercy or responsibility for them.
Given that the line that Johnson and the Brexiteers have been taking over the last years is: “We should allowed to do whatever we want because we’re special snowflakes” and they and their supporters in the media have already made it clear that they would feel entitled to break any international agreement when it suited, the only surprise here is that they are even bothering to try to find some legal justification.
But of course the EU and Irish Government will only be too aware of the rhetoric with which they have been exciting their followers and will be careful that any agreements are very difficult to get out of. Judging by the history so far I suspect a lot more thought has gone into this in Brussels and Dublin than in London.
The problem from the unionists’ perspective with this, would be in how they can’t guarantee Johnson and his right-wing cabal will still be in power at the time? Johnson is now what, 43 seats short of a majority or something?
And don’t believe YouGov’s polling, Corbyn is presented as a drooling idiot who couldn’t tie his own shoelaces most of the time. When, during a campaign, voters hear him speak in leaders’ debates and realise he’s talking a lot of sense, he and Labour get the inevitable resultant poll boost. A hung parliament with Labour as the largest party isn’t impossible.
One thing I can’t understand though, is why Labour don’t throw their weight behind the confirmatory referendum idea? Corbyn and his party previously(in early 2019) backed the Kyle amendment which would’ve forced a similar referendum on May’s deal. That fell short in terms of votes. But now, with many of 21 expelled Tories, the ones who’ve defected to the Lib Dems, Lib Dems , SNP and PC all in support of a confirmatory referendum Johnson could be defeated. Labour could defeat Johnson and Brexit, and for some reason Corbyn is dithering?
Corbyn is not a unionist. He is a Bennite who wants out of the union in question so he can introduce a left wing agenda unconstrained by pesky EU law. At the same time he is trying to appease the Blairite neocons in his own party who are trying to oust him. Hence the dithering. The last thing he wants is any say in the Brexit process. He wants it to be done and dusted by the time he comes to power. Unfortunately he’s going to alienate key Labour constituencies before then. Labour’s compromised position on Brexit has become transparently unconvincing and painful.
“He is a Bennite who wants out of the union in question so he can introduce a left wing agenda unconstrained by pesky EU law.”
You say that like it’s a bad thing!
If corbyn wanted out of the EU he should have advanced the benifit of Lexit, as put forward by people such as Bill Mitchell the MMT economist from Australia
Corbyns nothing but a big girls blouse, good for nothing more than slagging off the Tories,whilst allowing the EU a free ride,after all the EU have a very ambitious trade liberalisation agenda,privatisation in other words!
“If corbyn wanted out of the EU he should have advanced the benifit of Lexit, as put forward by people such as Bill Mitchell the MMT economist from Australia”
I wish! A great opportunity thrown away. I doubt Corbyn, bless ‘im, has even heard of MMT, let alone the acumen to understand how it interprets the money creation process in a nation with its own sovereign, fiat, non-convertible currency such as the UK.
AFAIK, the only parliamentarian who is, so far, aware of and fully on board with MMT, is the unfortunately beleaguered Chris Williamson.
John McDonnell did meet Prof. Bill Mitchell a year or two ago; instead of embracing MMT with open arms, JMcD appears to have completely ignored it, whilst his advisers actively argue with its principles, preferring instead to stick with pointless “Fiscal Credibility Rules”, hamstringing themselves from the start, and as such, playing away at Neoliberal United, when even Donald Trump and Boris Johnson would appear to understand that public sector deficits are not the bogey-man that liars like Thatcher and Osborne would have had you believe.
As any MMTer kno, budget deficits, and their accumulated so-called “debt”, are nothing more scary than the savings of the non-government sector, i.e. us. It’s simply money held by the private sector that hasn’t been spent yet, because its owners prefer to save. Once they spend it, the initial and subsequent transactions will be taxed, and the deficit and ultimately the debt will disappear. At which point – as happened in Australia in the early noughties – the non-government sector then will come begging the UK Gov to issue Gilts again, thereby growing the public “debt”, because they’re a very safe savings product.
I agree it was an absolute golden opportunity thrown down the toilet
But its not just an MMT issue its the whole point of what you’re trying to achieve economically
I’d suggest if we had a really clued up bunch of politicians in the U.K. we could have been a world leader in pioneering the circular economy which would have had massive and profound positive long term effects for the U.K.
But we have nothing,absolutely nothing to show other than very shallow thinking and belief in legacy ways of doing things, such as staying in the EU or tied to the Single Market
“…after all the EU have a very ambitious trade liberalisation agenda,privatisation in other words!”
What’s more, you don’t even have to be a member of the EU to be affected by these neoliberal policies.
Norwegian railway workers are on strike, as they – with the support of opposition leftwing MPs – are opposing the imminent privatisations on the network, was part of the EU’s Fourth Railway Package, designed to enforce competition and reduce subsidies across European railway systems..
“The EU wants to make it mandatory to have competition in public transport. We think that will weaken a coherent rail service in Norway,” said Norwegian Rail Drivers’ Union chairperson Rolf Ringdal.
Opposition Labour leader Jonas Gahr Støre said, “What is happening to Norway’s railway now is a step in the wrong direction. It is being pulverized and split up”
And Norway isn’t even in the EU, just a member of the single market via the EEA agreement.
It beats me how anyone calling themselves leftwing can support the EU, unless they are completely ignorant of its built-in, neoliberal, free-market biases.
* …as part of the EU’s Fourth Railway Package…
Mr Shigemitsu
I know, yes its all very true a number of years ago Norwegian dock workers also found themselves on the wrong end of an EFTA court case, all to maintain compliance with EU laws coming via the EEA agreement
Also the postal directive, which caused Norway to use its fabled right of reservation for the first time, although it didn’t take them long to cave in!
I find it simply astonishing that so many people still think the so called Norway option for leaving the EU is some sort of “off the shelf solution”, its not, its simply kicking the neoliberal can down the road and hoping nobody will notice
“I’d suggest if we had a really clued up bunch of politicians in the U.K. we could have been a world leader in pioneering the circular economy which would have had massive and profound positive long term effects for the U.K.”
Wouldn’t that be nice.
My feeling is that the really super-smart and capable people don’t need the mainstream and social media grief that MPs get these days, nor the pitiful salaries that they earn, compared to opportunities and rewards that are available to the very brightest and best in the private sector.
So we’re left with mediocre non-entities at best, and venal, power-hungry, conniving, revolving-door, careerist, sociopaths at worst!
You and Always Write are talking tosh for the sake of it and you probably know it.
“You and Always Write are talking tosh for the sake of it and you probably know it.”
Care to offer some reasoned debate if you don’t agree with what other people write, or are throwaway personal insults the best you can come up with?
AlwaysWrong.
Corbyn wasn’t a hard lexiteer at the referendum or now.
Thats why he campaigned for REMAIN.
thats why he got a MEANINGFUL VOTE ON ANY W.A.
Which is why the hard brexiteers plan – not left or right (actually top vs bottom) – has so nearly run out of rope.
Btw – i expect the Labour leadership is fully aware of MMT.
As you may ibiw Wren-Lewis and co have been advising. As was Richard Murphy (whom I personally think has a more rigorous theory on MMT especially in the Tax side).
But don’t let me stop your incessant Squirrel spotting.
Tick, tock…
I never said corbyn was a lexiteer, he’s frankly a nothing,no policy, no ideas, nothing but blather and sticking it to the Tories,….pathetic!
thats why he campaigned to remain plus he’s horribly conflicted with all his daft snowflake followers who think neoliberalism only exists in Tory Britain, hence staying in the EU will save them,which pretty much sums up how unfit to govern they are
Frankly i couldn’t care less about MMT, i only mentioned it because Mitchell has at least got a much better grasp about the EU than that bunch of dishonest nuggets in the labour party
@MJ
The “unionists'”I was referring to, were the Northern Irish (DUP. UUP) variety
Tbh, I’ve never heard pro-European Union people (or remainers) being described as unionists.
Johnson doesn’t give a shit about the DUP, they’re simply useful idiots serving his ambition. Which is, becoming a real PM with an actual (and permanent) right-wing Tory majority. To achieve this he is quite willing to trade the reunification of Ireland for Brexit, because a border in the Irish sea means exactly that, regardless of any legal shenanigans. Sometimes, you see, even the most loathesome behaviour can have some sort of useful side effect.
I too changed my mind about the EU after the Catalan referendum attempt. Now I’m dismayed by the Macron regime’s brutality towards the Gilets Jaunes, with a gruesome tally of lost hands and eyes – all apparently sanctioned by the EU. I’ve heard that troops from Eastern Europe are drafted in to help in the repression. A sign of things to come with military integration? A way to sidestep the reluctance of soldiers to shoot their fellow countrymen.
One could say similar about Westminster, and the Met police forces handling of Extinction Rebellion, smashing their way into ER’s HQ in London without a warrant, then arresting people randomly. Now the English government has drafted in 100 Scottish police officers from Police Scotland, taken from our streets to police London at the behest of a foreign government. Not only that but in the event of a no deal Brexit another 300 Scottish police officers are set to be sent to Northern Ireland, also at the behest of a English government.
Then of course there’s the outrageous detention of Julian Assange by the English courts, which is on a par with the Spanish courts disgraceful handling of the ex-Catalan leaders.
ROS
Well i’m with you on Assange and the Catalan leaders. The rest of your post is utter drivel.
The vast majority of the XR “arrests” has led to them being back at the protest within hours. Without charge!
Extinction Rebellion has been forced out of the whole of London, not very democratic is it.
As for the rest of my comment, its factual go check it out if you like.
“Now I’m dismayed by the Macron regime’s brutality towards the Gilets Jaunes, with a gruesome tally of lost hands and eyes ” .
That is wildly exaggerated. You conveniently forget how violent the ‘Black Blocs’ fighting with the Gilets Jaunes were. It was them that launched the extreme violence, not les flics. The response was bound to be robust, after they sacked the Arc de Triomphe and the Champs Elysées. Nobody expected the Gilets Jaunes to be so violent. (And I can tell you they were, I saw them).
“I’ve heard that troops from Eastern Europe are drafted in to help in the repression.”
You’ve heard a lot of bizarre stories, it seems.
Yes, they even allow civilians to dress up as police officers and attack gilets Jaunes:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/emmanuel-macron-security-official-alexandre-benalla-filmed-hitting-protester
Benalla became a scandal. You forgot to mention that.
I think your idea that Boris is negotiating a deal that he intends to renege on is ridiculous, as you say , your information comes from the FCO a hotbed of Remainers who I can easily imagine are saying that.
If people who don’t like the current government are going to say that it can’t be trusted and therefore they are not going to to do any deals with them, what will happen when Labour or whoever gets in next ?
It will be the end of democracy as we know it.
Fascinating that you think that the current PM and ‘trust’ are natural bedfellows.
My views on the EU
A Neo-Liberal, globalist super state, closely alligned to the Bilderburg Group. Three of the heads of the EU have come from the Luxembourg political/elite class, a tiny country well known for money laundering and tax evasion schemes. There are 28 EU Commisioners and around 780 MEP’s. When the various chancellors of the various EU states designs a budget, it has to be approved by the EU – hence the recent kerfuffle involving Italy, and in the past, Greece, France and Netherlands. Budgets = austerity measures, which always negatively impact on the poorest in society, whilst the staff at the EU enjoy huge rewards for dishing out this torture.
Then we have – Freedom of Movement – a fine idea in theory, if only there was a level playing field, which there isn’t. What has been created here, is a dream for rich industrialists, who can now maximise profits by draining a huge pool of cheap resources – labour.
I really like Europe, the people, the different cultures, but I have nothing but loathing for the EU as an entity.
It was once a fine concept which has now started to go rotten.
“A Neo-Liberal, globalist super state, closely alligned to the Bilderburg Group.”
What you mean like Nato that allows Turkey to massacre the Kurds at will.
“tiny country well known for money laundering and tax evasion schemes.”
Or the tiny British Cayman island a tax haven for the many.
“austerity measures, which always negatively impact on the poorest in society, ”
What you mean like Britain where hundreds if not thousands of people have died due a decade of severe British government austerity.
“Freedom of Movement – a fine idea in theory, if only there was a level playing field, which there isn’t. ”
What you mean like Britain getting a far better deal than other EU states by being allowed outside the Schegen area.
“but I have nothing but loathing for the EU as an entity.”
Tell that to the million of folk in Britain whose jobs depend on accessing the EU and its markets.
Republicofscotland
I think you missed the part about the EU forcing individual member states to impose austerity measures.
What the heck has NATO and Turkey got to do with anything?
“I think you missed the part about the EU forcing individual member states to impose austerity ”
You’ve been living under austertiy for nigh on a decade now.
Nato is a neoliberal group, of which Britain is a member. It uses its might now not for protection but in a proactive way damaging countries economies such as in Iraq.
But would an independent Scotland apply for NATO membership?
Correct about NATO’s role in the world order. But are you suggesting that NATO controls the EU’s austerity economic policy?
Republicofscotland
I personally think that NATO should be disbanded, particularly as it contains Turkey and all the possible conflicts of interest which that could provoke in the very near future. I also think that it has been misused, particularly by the US, to place troops and weaponry right next to the Russian border.
However, it has absolutely nothing to do with austerity policy in various countries, which has been driven by the EU.
https://www.redpepper.org.uk/the-trouble-with-being-both-anti-austerity-and-pro-eu/
Alwayswrite.
There would probably be a vote on it as the UK has the member status presently.
Tony.
No I’m not suggesting that, I’m merely pointing out that severe austerity exists at home. Yet some are surprised that austerity exists elsewhere such as in the EU.
Anyoldlabour.
I agree that Nato set up to protect, is now more of a proactive club, a club that the USA wants to see its members spend considerably more on military spending.
Again no Nato is nothing to do with austerity in the EU. I used Nato as an example of a club that can cause severe austerity, due to its military action by its members.
Sounds about right
You forgot to mention a good deal of the original funding to create the right kind of mood for a European super state came from the Americans,via the CIA
All those people who support this bent covert corporate power grab seem to think it’s there to prevent nasty Tories from being noughty doing unpleasant trade deals with Trump, they seem to forget it was the wonderfully fluffy Obama administration which negotiated the very secretive TTIP deal with the disgraceful EU trade commission which would have resulted in more privatisation of just about everything
Of course all those pro EU fanatics tend to forget this
Here’s a quick question for you: how is your description of the EU any different to the United Kingdom? Indeed, there are a lot of arguments to the effect that the EU has a more transparent culture of democratic influence than the UK, in that changes to the structure are governed by treaties that require unanimous support and acceptance by all of the member states, whereas in the UK a government can impose a change to the entire system on the basis of a single vote victory in the House of Commons (indeed, they seem to be attempting to do that right now.)
(Again, I am not advocating a position that says that the EU is a magical utopia, nor that Westminster is a conspiratorial wet-dream. I just continue to be startled by folk advocating views that seem to forget that the UK is a federal superstate itself. I find it even more amazing that they get posted on a site hosted by someone who makes that point fairly often!)
If the EU was more transparent why was it literally shamed into disclosing the details about TTIP?
As for the host of this website what seems startling to me is his independence stance for Scotland which would amount to nothing more than surrender to the EU and its liberalisation agenda which frankly would make a total mockery of what the SNP would try to do as an independent government
Your point about acceptance by member states doesn’t confer acceptance by the citizens, or legitimacy of those member states government s hence the resistance to so called trade deals done by corporate lobbyists behind closed doors, austerity and the rise of populism
The UK government system is certainly bad, but i suppose it comes down to our form of democracy and what Anthony Wedgwood Benn said years ago about being able to kick people out if you didn’t like them, we cant get rid of the commission can we!
Its called democratic deficit apparently, but we like to kid ourselves that it doesn’t apply because some one nominated by our government can go and negotiate on our behalf behind closed doors,in or out of the EU its a major problem,but I’d suggest easier to fix outside of a supra national organization like the EU
“ When the various chancellors of the various EU states designs a budget, it has to be approved by the EU – hence the recent kerfuffle involving Italy, and in the past, Greece, France and Netherlands”
To be fair, this only applies to *Eurozone* countries, in particular, those placed in the Excessive Deficit Procedure of the Stability and Growth Pact (e.g. Italy). But this is nevertheless still conspicuously anti-democratic, insofar as EU technocrats can override elected governments who wish to increase public spending in order to improve the lot of their long-suffering citizenry.
For those countries in “excessive” deficit (i.e. over 3% of GDP) but not in the EZ (e.g. the UK), the worst that can happen is that the Chancellor receives a stroppy letter from the EU.
This did actually happen on one occasion under Osborne’s watch, but thanks to the fact that the UK has always retained its own currency, it thankfully had no effect whatsoever.
Perhaps, what you latest “posts” are showing is the historical fact that revolutionary times are hard on moderates.
Revolutionary times are were extreme views are the only options and the past moderate “rules” are discarded for the “law of the powerful”.
“To negotiate an agreement with the secret intention of breaking it in future is a grossly immoral proceeding”
Britain didn’t attain the moniker “perfidious Albion” for nothing. History is replete with examples of such conduct.
“The situation that Johnson and Raab appear now to contemplate is agreeing a “backstop” now to get Brexit done, but then not implementing the agreed backstop when the time comes due to “force majeure”.”
The phrase: “Perfidious Albion” comes to mind..
Making false promises? British politicians? Perish the thought! You can be a bit naive Craig.
Panic setting in all round this government.
Won’t snatch a No Deal.
City fucked.
Syrian war over, a humiliating pull out. Bolton dumped. Tanker war lost.
City and MIC fucked.
Corbynites certain to form next government
They are all fucking fucked.
That’s civil service language btw.
Even the Groans changing tack!
Clearly Mr Murray has never heard of realpolitik; bad faith negotiation, is just negotiation.
I doubt if the EU is going to be fooled by these tricks.
I doubt it too.
When the Europeans set out to rule the world with their Westphalian treaty , England wasn’t even involved.
British Empire came and went – all that’s left is the age old aristo throwbacks and their martial histories – where every generation was some over promoted war junkie and criminal – who still believe they own and run the place!
“I seldom comment on Brexit, largely because I neither see leaving the EU as a panacea nor the EU itself as a Utopia, and am alienated by the over-extravagant passions and claims on both sides.”
Indeed. Brexit is merely – and hopefully still – a catalyst for much needed change in these islands and beyond. A logical solution to the present impasse might be if England withdrew from its political and economic union with the EU and also the UK – leaving Scotland, Wales and Ireland to retain membership under the banner of the UK. Perhaps in time, we can rename it to the United Celtic Kingdom – or it can be quietly abolished, which would be my preference. What a prospect for Scotland – a country where Indy supporters and Unionists can live happily ever after! In time, we might even be disposed to giving the Queen a Visa, if she’s still chewing the cud.
Governance is simply an administrative responsibility. It’s supposed to facilitate the way we live. None of these things are of any real importance in the real world. We may consume ourselves in such nonsense, but as Joe South once sung, it’s just games people play.
It only matters to our generation, who cling on to these things as if they somehow give our own lives meaning. Thank fuck the kids can see right through this shite. I really hope the end of the British Establishment will be the first domino in many to fall in the next few years – I sincerely hope I live long enough to see the last. History records the contribution of every generation. To what, is the question.
Clearly not this..
But Mr Murray certainly isn’t lacking in “over-extravagant passion” when it comes to Scottish independence, although once “free” these so called Scottish independence people want to jump in with the EU, which frankly is about the most stupid thing I’ve ever heard, why gain independence just to give it away to the anti democratic,fascist supporting EU?
So speaking of the most stupid thing(s) you haven’t heard/known of, how about, – the House of “Lords”? Of Black Rod? Of the Queen’s Speech, with horse-driven Cinderella carriage etc.Of some pre Treaty of Union ( between Scotland and England if you are unaware) Henry V111 decree that Westminster hoped use to push through Brexit. Of Johnson being called Prime Minister having secured votes from some 0.10% of the electorate – 99.9% were excluded from the vote.
Gavin C Barrie
Do you think it was right that Gordon Brown was simply chosen to be follow on PM in an uncontested election?
I have no time for any of them, they are all as bad as each other.
RT’s take
Brexit deal ‘possible this week’ says EU’s Barnier, Germany’s Roth not so sure
https://www.rt.com/uk/470948-barnier-brexit-deal-possible-soon/
I comfort myself with the thought that Goldsmith might himself be religious and cowering.
Thinking about Peter Goldsmith’s religion (and that of Bush’s legal advisors)….
…the more I study these matters, the less I think that they in any way ‘cower’.
What you do not address is ‘Why do we need a Withdrawl Agreement?’. We do not. Further both the EU (Junker in the Dail and the UK on numerous occasions) and UK have stated NO HARD BORDER on the island. Numerous reports and studies have confirmed same. It is the elite who en masse do not respect the result of the referendum. I note your petition for International OSCE observers but what is the point of that if the result would be ignored?
The EU commissioned its own report by the worlds foremost expert on borders, he claimed in his report and was very clear that due to advances in technologies there really wasn’t any need for a hard border,plus from memory the expert claimed a state of the art border would actually facilitate trade and become a model for the rest of the world
Needless to say the EU ignored it!but i suppose we can argue about negotiating in bad faith instead, far more interesting
Advances in technology mean that I can no longer do the maintenance on my car. My “modern car” is no more reliable but servicing costs are expensive. Be careful what you wish for.
i suggest trying a horse and cart then
Gavin C Barrie
Unless you drive a very new supercar, then it is very easy to still do basic maintenance on a modern car. Mine is a 5 year old VAG diesel, and I do pads and discs, ball joints and tie rods, oil and filter changes.
I must say that I don’t quite understand how you can have a hard border, as required by “Britain taking back control”, but nevertheless have an open border. Sure, customs documents can be cleared off-border, no problem. But what about smuggling and all that no-one wants to quite admit. It’s open-house for whatever you want to do.
arrrrgh smugglers being a problem ‘tis true!
How about an eighteen foot concrete wall coast to coast? That’ll fix the patch eyed bastards. (Reduction ad absurdism)
It cannot be stopped no matter what form the boarder takes you are just putting up a straw man.
Yesterday by chance I dipped into a recently released Project Gutenberg book from 1861 “The Last Travels of Ida Pfeiffer”, a remarkable Austrian woman, who made Madagascar her last final port of call. Her summary of the history of Madagascar includes this.
“The English very cleverly made use of this disposition of the king’s, and managed to get into high favour with him. Radama (King) was soon so prepossessed by them that he allowed them distinctions of every kind, and sometimes even wore an English uniform. He likewise made a treaty with England, by which he bound himself to give up the export slave-trade. —-
Radama kept the treaty strictly; but not so did the English General Hall, who succeeded Mr. Farquhar as Governor of the Mauritius. General Hall seems to have held the doctrine that savages are not men. He was not ashamed to declare openly that a contract made with a chief of savages was entirely invalid, and accordingly he constantly broke the treaty. A natural consequence of this manner of dealing was that Radama again licensed the slave-trade, and began to favour the French at the expense of the English….”.
Perhaps this intrinsic sense of superiority is so hard wired in the British (English) psyche that breaking a treaty with any inferior entity such as the EU is second nature.
My experience is that I don’t consider that the English psyche is one of superiority. Many years back I was managing a contract in the Far east, and we hired a ship with a crane from a local company managed by an Englishman. The crane constantly failed, and at meeting to address the problem with the Chinese owner of the vessel the English manager stated ” You have a contract with us for a ship with a crane, the contract doesn’t state that the crane must be functional”. And not my first experience of such an attitude.
Perfidious Albion, and is being well exposed during the Brexit negotiations. Viz, ongoing UK media discussions.. ” can we agree a deal that we can subsequently break, just to get us through this?”.
“To negotiate an agreement with the secret intention of breaking it in future is a grossly immoral proceeding, and undermines the whole principle of good international relations.
Michael Collins had a similar idea in mind when he signed the 1922 Treaty as a ‘stepping stone’ to complete Irish independence (getting shot, as he guessed, the following year by the IRA for what they saw as a sell-out).
Chilling! The man is a dangerous fool. What can we do to stop him?