[ad_1]
The ambient music emanating from the Brexit talks has become more upbeat. Let’s hope the tune remains upbeat in the few days left to close a deal.
For No Deal will not only have serious negative consequences for Britain and the European Union. It would be a setback for the West and democracies everywhere.
The 21st century was destined to achieve the definitive triumph of democracy. Instead, its first two decades have been marked by the rise of authoritarianism.
From Beijing to Moscow, through Ankara, Riyadh and other major world capitals, we have witnessed the rise of the strong man and the retreat of democratic progress.
For No Deal will not only have serious and negative consequences for Great Britain and the European Union. It would be a setback for the West and democracies everywhere (file photo)
Failure
Even established democracies have not been immune to the cult of the autocrat, as illustrated by Donald Trump’s United States, Jair Bolsonaro’s Brazil, and Narendra Modi’s India.
The failure of Western economies to recover strongly from the Great Crash of 2008 (and rising inequalities exacerbated by slow growth) encouraged authoritarians around the world to argue that free markets were no longer the best engine for economic growth. and prosperity.
The West’s inability to control the Covid pandemic (in stark contrast to the success of many Asian countries) has further emboldened authoritarian regimes.
Britain and the EU share the most fundamental values: liberal democracy, market economy, rule of law, with equality for all under the law.
They have so many common interests: joint defenses against authoritarian aggression, security and intelligence cooperation against the ubiquitous terrorist threat, support for free trade between nations to spur prosperity around the world, a commitment to zero net carbon emissions by 2050.
If two entities that share so much of the good in the world, and are largely united in hostility to the bad, cannot agree to their post-Brexit deals in harmony and with mutual respect, then make no mistake about it: authoritarians around the world. world will be celebrating. .
They will see it as one more nail in the coffin of Western democracy. They will be more certain than ever that the 21st century belongs to them.
The 21st century was destined to achieve the definitive triumph of democracy. Instead, its first two decades have been marked by the rise of authoritarianism ()
So the penalty for failing Brexit negotiations is far greater than the cost of tariffs on British lamb or the inconvenience of long lines in Dover.
Those who are immersed in the details of these conversations must lift their heads for a moment and appreciate the enormous price of failure, which could ruin us all for years to come.
It would be especially ridiculous not to reach a deal now, when about 98 percent of the Brexit deal has already been resolved. Allowing the remaining 2 percent to get in the way would be a monumental failure of statecraft, on a par with the appeasement of the democracies of Nazi Germany in the 1930s and the Anglo-French invasion of Suez in 1956 with a fake prospect.
Of course, the final 2% is important. It is always. But if, as seems likely, the EU is now willing to abandon its insistence on a ‘ratchet clause’, whereby Brussels could unilaterally impose far-reaching tariffs and / or quotas on British exports to the EU if it considers that Britain is not complying according to EU rules and regulations, then there is a deal to be done.
If, as possible, Britain deviates from EU standards as the years go by (not to lower standards but to different ones), then Brussels might have reason to complain. As long as this is done through independent arbitration and any sanctions are limited in scope (to the sector in which the divergence has occurred), Britain should be able to live with that.
Yes, Brexit should mean greater British sovereignty. But sovereignty is not free. It can have consequences. If exercising our right to diverge results in an adverse response from the EU, then that is something we will have to weigh at that point. We could still decide to go our own way if we think it is for our general benefit.
However, one thing is very clear now: if the choice is between the certainty of generalized tariffs on January 1 (no agreement) and the possibility of capped tariffs in some sectors in the coming years (agreement), then surely the latter would be Okay. old-fashioned British pragmatism in action.
What seems important to our economy now may not be in the future. So why not suck it up and watch it?
If these so-called ‘level playing field’ problems can be solved in this way, then there would be fish left.
President Emmanuel Macron has upped the ante on this. He is terrified that French fishermen will become the new yellow vests, dumping tons of cod on the Champs-Elysées and sparking a new round of street protests, with a presidential election less than 18 months away and the biggest threat to him from the right. populist.
But if Britain is prepared to accept less than ideal level playing field deals, the EU in general, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in particular, should be prepared to lean on President Macron.
Scupper
Additional compensation for French fishermen and a higher French share of post-Brexit EU fishing quotas (sorry Ireland will lose, but no deal would be the worst for you) should work. If fishing quotas are allowed to spoil a deal, Presidents Xi and Putin will conclude that we have lost the plot.
They will see it as one more nail in the coffin of Western democracy. So the penalty for the failure of the Brexit negotiations is far greater than the cost of the tariffs on British lamb or the inconvenience of long lines in Dover (pictured Dec. 11).
True Brexit believers will hate a deal in this regard. It will be a slim deal, not so much the Canada + they promised, but more Canada Dry. But Brexit supporters assured us during and after the referendum that a free trade agreement with Brussels would be the easiest and most far-reaching in history. Therefore, your credibility when it comes to doing business is not high.
There will be many in the heart of the EU who will also be unhappy with the possible deal (if there is one). But the talks were soured early on by the desire of the Brussels elite to punish Britain for having the recklessness to leave the EU, and to make it so unpleasant that no other EU member would do the same.
The EU position was always illogical. He thought that Brexit was an incalculable act of self-harm on Britain’s part. However, he also wanted to limit a post-Brexit UK so that it couldn’t go too far on its own. It was never explained why a country they thought was heading to basket case status needed to be so shackled.
Precipice
I suspect that the real fear in Brussels from the beginning has been that Britain will make Brexit a success. That remains to be seen. The important thing now is that a deal is made and that politicians on both sides of the English Channel focus on the future, which is not necessarily bright.
The euro zone is likely to be the last major region in the world to recover economically from the pandemic. The euro is skyrocketing, the price of European exports out of foreign markets, the European Central Bank is running out of firepower even further to stimulate the European economy, and core inflation is heading for zero, all of which add up. to a continent in a Japanese-style deflationary. precipice, with stagnation as far as the eye can see.
Britain should not be satisfied with this. We need a dynamic eurozone to prosper. And our politicians have their own work cut out. They need to tell us what exactly a post-Brexit UK is going to do with its newly returned sovereignty.
What is the strategy to put the country at the forefront of artificial intelligence, the pharmaceutical industry, robotics, digitization and 5G? All of which could grow in a UK that is no longer held back by overly cautious EU regulation.
British politicians have been silent on what they plan to do about Brexit. After January 1, there will be no excuse for more silence.
