[ad_1]
NurPhoto via Getty Images
How important is an international agreement if the person who signed it violates it? Nothing. Wasted paper and much damage to international law, to diplomatic conventions between states, to peaceful relations at a global level. That is why Boris Johnson’s bid to pass a national law (‘Internal Market Bill’) that destroys the agreement he himself signed with the European Union last year is a maneuver that can destabilize the foundations of relations between nations worldwide. Set a precedent, in addition to specifying the risk of a ‘no deal’: Definitive Brexit at the end of the year without an agreement with Brussels.
At first, it seemed like a threat from a broken prime minister to handle the pandemic. But Downing Street is serious. Today the House of Commons defeated Labor’s attempt to amend the text of the discord, approved yesterday in Westminster with 390 votes in favor to 263 against. Defections among the same conservatives (two no and thirty abstentions), but Johnson won with a majority of more than 77 elected.
It is another step into the abyss of no agreement. Another step towards a world in which – as provided for by Johnson’s provision – London, free from the EU, will be able to decide that goods will transit uncontrollably to and from Northern Ireland, in violation of the agreement signed last year. lastly, with Brussels, according to which these goods should instead be classified as “exports”. The fear of Europeans is that, without proper controls, these goods, without compliance with EU rules, could ‘contaminate’ the common market across the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, which cannot be physical , otherwise it would violate the agreements. of peace on ‘Good Friday’ (1998).
Allergic to any coherence, faithful to a certain way of doing politics always shouted and interested in the immediate result (from Donald Trump through Johnson to the sovereigns of our house), the conservative leader violates the agreements for which he has also rejoiced for some time one year. Back when he brought home the ‘Withdrawal Agreement’, the agreement on the UK’s exit from the EU that, before him, had made Theresa May suffer in Downing Street. Just a couple of weeks ago, the London government admitted that the Internal Market Act “violates international agreements.” In Brussels they breathed a sigh of relief. But Johnson, obviously, is not to be trusted.
And now in Brussels they are “seriously concerned”, EU sources report. Europeans await the next developments in the debate in London, reiterating the threat of legal action if Johnson does not withdraw the measure before the end of the month. “The Commission was extremely clear,” EU executive spokesman Eric Mamer said today. But the prime minister does not appear to have collapsed.
The calculation is to pull the rope to the extreme, to bend the Europeans in the still open points of the negotiation. In Brussels, there are those who hope that Johnson will point to the European Council in mid-October as an opportunity for the last negotiation. But now, formally, Britain is no longer part of it, based on the agreement signed last year.
And then, while the internal market bill continues its semi-imperturbable parliamentary process, the hypothesis, never so concrete, of the ‘no agreement’ looms. We didn’t even need the appeals of four former prime ministers of different political colors: David Cameron, John Major, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown. The reasoning of those, like former Chancellor of the Exchequer Sajid Javid and former Attorney General Geoffrey Cox, say they are concerned about the reputation of the UK: from the homeland of the ‘rule of law’, respect for the rule of law, a nation that does not respect international agreements.
But this is Johnson’s “perfect world.” Or rather: imperfect, especially disjointed so that it can be folded according to the needs of the moment, preferably not agreed with other partners, if it is not convenient. In order to ‘liberate’ British companies from European constraints, while regaining consensus lost with the chaotic management of the pandemic, Johnson launches the ‘no deal’ card. And evidently he is not afraid of the consequences, at least for the moment.
It would mean being able to decide independently about your own economy. It would be a concrete threat to the common market of an EU that cannot yet conclude a trade and investment agreement with China. Even there they do what they like, but they manage to dictate the law in the world. So much so that Johnson is also inspired by the Beijing model, perhaps unknowingly. Among the violated agreements, there is also a part that refers to state aid to British companies.
In a world like this, democratic institutions like the EU struggle. Not surprisingly, speaking today in the plenary session of the European Parliament, the High Representative for EU Foreign Policy, Josep Borrell, concluded: “Europe is facing a situation in which the old empires are returning.” The reference is to Russia, China, Turkey. Already. The Union suffers from this, almost defenseless by choice, calculation or necessity.
[ad_2]
