[ad_1]
A shameful request for rogue state status, a deliberate step that will destroy Britain’s moral authority on the world stage and damage its position in international trade, and an unsurprising move by a Prime Minister who cannot be trusted.
These are some of the ways that the media in Britain and Europe have described Boris Johnson’s decision to break the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement that he signed last year.
With talks on a post-Brexit trade deal in jeopardy after Brussels demanded that the UK abandon plans to nullify key elements of the deal, the reaction of most newspapers to Johnson’s move, that the UK government United admits that it contravenes international law, it has been deeply dismissive.
The Guardian editorial says the government’s plans “read like a request for rogue status.”
“By touting its willingness to waive some of its treaty obligations to the European Union, the Boris Johnson government has portrayed Britain as a country that does not act in good faith and cannot be trusted to keep its word,” he says. the newspaper.
“It subverts the rule of law at home and abroad. It takes away the reputation of Great Britain everywhere from Ireland to Hong Kong, and anywhere else where people hope they can trust Great Britain to play fair. “
The document calls on Tory MPs, who will reportedly rebel against Johnson over the saga, to ensure Britain abides by the deal.
“It is time for parliamentarians to reclaim the parliamentary sovereignty that is at the heart of our politics and quickly put an end to a shameful episode,” he says.
The Guardian columnist Fintan O’Toole writes: “Everybody knows that Boris Johnson can lie for England. For his followers, it was one of his best assets.
“The problem is that congenital mendacity is not only for foreigners. If you lie for England, you will also lie to England.
“By openly admitting that it signed the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU in bad faith, the Johnson’s Vote Leave government also implicitly confessed that it lied to the electorate in the general election last December.”
The Times asks why Attorney General Suella Braverman and Attorney General Robert Buckland have not yet resigned, as they had a duty to uphold the rule of law.
The document says that the greatest danger is not that Britain’s international position will be damaged by doubts about its integrity, nor that it yields any moral authority in countries that require countries like Russia, China and Iran to abide by international law, or ruin a country. Brexit trade agreement.
“The greatest danger,” he says, “is that the government undermines the general public’s trust in the rule of law. That was already being tested, especially by the increasing attacks by politicians on the judiciary.
“If even the government’s own law enforcement officials are not upholding the rule of law as it is openly mocking, who will?
The Daily Mirror recalls that Johnson told voters last year that he had a “baked-in deal” for Brexit.
He says that, with his “hostile act” this week, he has “poisoned relations with Brussels, degraded the UK’s position on the world stage and represents a risk to the Good Friday Agreement.”
“Unless there is a last minute compromise, we are faced with the prospect of a harmful no-deal Brexit just as we begin to recover from the coronavirus lockdown,” he says.
Even the conservative Daily Telegraph takes a cautious tone, warning of the dangers of a possible trade war emerging from what it calls “a high-stakes move at a key point in talks aimed at reaching a trade deal by the end of the year.”
“We understand that risky policy is de rigueur in EU negotiations,” the document says, “but a trade war that would follow a total collapse would benefit no one.”
In Europe, the German magazine Der Spiegel says: “Is a contract a contract? Not for Boris Johnson. “
Noting that UK chief negotiator David Frost may ask for more realism from the EU, the magazine says: “That’s funny. Because on the EU side, we have been wondering for a long time how to be realistic with a negotiating partner that adjusts reality on a weekly basis ”.
In France, Liberation sums up the “shocking” movement by saying: “The democratic government of a country respected throughout the world for its legal rigor has proposed to include non-compliance with international law in its national legislation.”
The newspaper adds that the measure is not surprising, coming from a Prime Minister who last year “tried to justify the unjustifiable when he illegally suspended parliament”, and who has “repeatedly demonstrated that his reputation, and that of his country, does not bother him” .
Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad says the move is in line with last year Johnson demoted MPs who disagreed with him and extended parliament, other measures that fall under the “beloved chaos theory” he uses to reach your objectives.
El Pais de España said it is not yet clear if the plan is “just another barbaric negotiating ploy,” but said it has “poisoned the already tense climate” of the withdrawal talks.
[ad_2]