The Brexit aftermath thread

[Noradin]

So basically you are saying you can leave the EU (but really you can't)

The EU allows you to leave, but you (the UK, specifically) cannot because you made other treaties that require you stay in.
Those treaties you have to break or to renegotiate if you want to just leave.
But that isn't a problem of the EU, it is a problem of the UK.

Just like you can jump of the waterfront, but if you didn't take precautions to have a boat to bring you across the water you'll get wet.

[Noradin]

Just want to chip in to say, talkative as he may be, Slant does not, in fact, represent anything other than Slant.

No one here but moderators represent anyone but themselves, because that would require offering credentials--which in turn is against forum rules and would get you banned and the information in question deleted.

- - - Updated - - -

Just draw the eu/uk border along the Scotland/England border. We’ll be leaving the uk in a decade or so anyway.

Sure. Draw up a treaty, get your representatives to sign it (unfortunately the UK holds that authority for you) and be prepared to set up that border wall again.

Scotland with its civil law is much more suited for membership in the EU than England is, anyway.

[AeneasBK]

No one here but moderators represent anyone but themselves, because that would require offering credentials--which in turn is against forum rules and would get you banned and the information in question deleted.

Pretty sure Genn Greymane represents Gilneas...

[Rockyreg]

No, what he is saying is that you do not get to abuse the situation in NI to extort something from the EU like you did with Scotland.

But its ok to abuse the situation to effectively annexe part of the UK?

- - - Updated - - -

It can unilaterally decide for their side of the border.
It can also unilaterally decide to take one of the EU's offers (that's why they are called "offers", because the other side can unilaterally decide to take them or not to take them) that allow for an open border.

So the UK could put in a 'light touch' border with technological solutions on its side then?

[caervek]

Oh yes it would have been.

Again, no I wasn't talking about a hard brexit.

I wouldn't feel comfortable with the border security relying on "assuming it's hard to get into the UK." Sorry, but that would mean the external border of the EU relies on the integrity of a third party. That's bollocks. Sure, I know the UK can maintain their border properly, but I don't want to have to rely on a third party to control the integrity of my own political entity. Aside from fringe cases like the Vatican, that's quite outrageous to suggest.

So basically, you acknowledge that UK border security is even harder to breach than mainland EU border security, but are still opposed to RoI/NI having an open border, just because? No offense but you're sounding a tad like the brexiteer there with their reasoning of "but mah sovereignty!".

[Noradin]

But its ok to abuse the situation to effectively annexe part of the UK?

So the UK could put in a 'light touch' border with technological solutions on its side then?

No one is annexing anything.
The EU might not even take NI if the UK were to offer it.

It is not the EU's fault that the UK does not know what it wants and has itself tied in knots with all its treaties.
You are a sovereign state, you had a solution that worked. You unilaterally decided to change it, so ultimately it is on you to find an alternative solution.
The EU offering proposals is not a right you have, it is something you get because the EU decided it might as well.

And yes, you could "put in a 'light touch' border with technological solutions" on your side, but that would still mean you break the GFA if you do not offer treaties that allow the RoI to keep their side open too without breaking its existing treaties.
You are the ones changing something, the ones going back on the implemented solution to the GFA. It is on you to offer an acceptable solution to this problem to RoI.
No one will trust you if you just go back on your word dilly dally any time you come up with a new fantasy how the world should cater to the UK--and that would make your chances to get favourable trade agreements with anyone really bad.

[caervek]

The simple explanation (not saying I like it) is that all countries control their borders. England chooses closed with France and open with NI, NI chooses open with England and open with RoI, RoI chooses open with NI and open with France, France chooses open with RoI and closed with England.

If France is unhappy that it's open border with RoI may cause it troubles then the solution for them (albeit not convenient/desirable) is obvious.

Demand the RoI keep their commitments?

Well no the obvious answer is for France to close its open border with NI if they are unhappy about having one.

I'm not suggesting they do that or that anyone would want that, but it's a lot more reasonable than trying to make Ireland alter it's borders just to suit France.

[Noradin]

So basically, you acknowledge that UK border security is even harder to breach than mainland EU border security, but are still opposed to RoI/NI having an open border, just because? No offense but you're sounding a tad like the brexiteer there with their reasoning of "but mah sovereignty!".

No.
Basically it is: We do not trust you to keep your word anymore unless we have you by the balls.
You will have proven to be untrustworthy. Plain and simple.
You will be a third country. Like China. Or Russia.

- - - Updated - - -

Well no the obvious answer is for France to close its open border with NI if they are unhappy about having one.

I'm not suggesting they do that or that anyone would want that, but it's a lot more reasonable than trying to make Ireland alter it's borders just to suit France.

Why would they close a border with NI they don't have when they have treaties in place that ensure the problem is taken care of (by RoI).
Not everyone is as untrustworthy as you propose the UK should act. Some nations keep their treaties.
I do not see RoI trying to get rid of the existing implementation of the GFA that worked for years.

Why would Ireland, France, and all those other EU member states alter their borders just to please the UK?
A third country that unilaterally decided to take the GFA hostage to extort the rest of us.

[caervek]

Why would they close a border with NI they don't have when they have treaties in place that ensure the problem is taken care of (by RoI).

Because if France find the idea of having an open border to NI/UK via the RoI is just unworkable for them they they can either lump it or close their border with RoI to fix their problem, they shouldn't expect other countries to solve their problem for them.

Some nations keep their treaties.

The EU knew full well when it agreed to treaties with the UK/RoI that we already had existing treaties which superseded the EU ones in the event or either of us withdrawing.

[Rockyreg]

No one is annexing anything.
The EU might not even take NI if the UK were to offer it.

It is not the EU's fault that the UK does not know what it wants and has itself tied in knots with all its treaties.
You are a sovereign state, you had a solution that worked. You unilaterally decided to change it, so ultimately it is on you to find an alternative solution.
The EU offering proposals is not a right you have, it is something you get because the EU decided it might as well.

And yes, you could "put in a 'light touch' border with technological solutions" on your side, but that would still mean you break the GFA if you do not offer treaties that allow the RoI to keep their side open too without breaking its existing treaties.
You are the ones changing something, the ones going back on the implemented solution to the GFA. It is on you to offer an acceptable solution to this problem to RoI.
No one will trust you if you just go back on your word dilly dally any time you come up with a new fantasy how the world should cater to the UK--and that would make your chances to get favourable trade agreements with anyone really bad.

Who would enforce the Vienna Convention with regards to supposedly breaking the treaty?

[Kiri]

Because if France find the idea of having an open border to NI/UK via the RoI is just unworkable for them they they can either lump it or close their border with RoI to fix their problem, they shouldn't expect other countries to solve their problem for them.



The EU knew full well when it agreed to treaties with the UK/RoI that we already had existing treaties which superseded the EU ones in the event or either of us withdrawing.

Isn't that exactly what you are suggesting though? France being forced to fix the ROI/NI border problem because you can't reconcile the GFA with what you want?

Plus, the UK ratified all those treaties as well, knowing about the GFA. The UK also knew about this problem before triggering the article and setting a date for withdrawal. They had all the time in the world to find a solution but instead decided to go ahead and trigger it to appease Brexiteers.

[caervek]

Isn't that exactly what you are suggesting though? France being forced to fix the ROI/NI border problem because you can't reconcile the GFA with what you want?

No because it's not our problem it's France/EU's. RoI/UK are both fine with an open border between RoI/UK and RoI/France, it's France that has the issue with it.

France/EU don't want a hard border between France/RoI, they also don't want an open one between RoI/UK. The problem is those are their only options.

[Kiri]

No because it's not our problem it's France/EU's. RoI/UK are both fine with an open border between RoI/UK and RoI/France, it's France that has the issue with it.

France/EU don't want a hard border between France/RoI, they also don't want an open one between RoI/UK. The problem is those are their only options.

Are they? I am not aware of any declaration by the RoI that they are fine with an open border in a no-deal scenario. As outlined above, under WTO rules the UK would not want an open border as well. Refusal to believe a problem exists does not get rid of it; otherwise we would not need doctors and hospitals.

[caervek]

Refusal to believe a problem exists does not get rid of it; otherwise we would not need doctors and hospitals.

Oh there is a problem, but it's the EU's problem and up to them to find a compromise that works for everyone. They knew full well when the UK/RoI were admitted to the EEC in '73 that we had an existing open border agreement dating back half a century and they were fine with that.
Then when the EU single market was formed in '93 they knew that the CTA took precedence. If they failed to plan for the possibility of one of us leaving the EU then that's regrettable but not our problem.

[Kiri]

Oh there is a problem, but it's the EU's problem and up to them to find a compromise that works for everyone. They knew full well when the UK/RoI were admitted to the EEC in '73 that we had an existing open border agreement dating back half a century and they were fine with that.
Then when the EU single market was formed in '93 they knew that the CTA took precedence. If they failed to plan for the possibility of one of us leaving the EU then that's regrettable but not our problem.

The EU is positively seeking precisely that compromise. They made it their top priority to ensure one is found.
The UK still agreed to the very rules that are currently causing problems. It is just as much to blame for kicking the bin down the road as the EU is. The UK and RoI joined together; people simply did not believe that decades later one of them would leave without the other - possibly precisely because of those agreements. The UK unilaterally decided to cause the current situation, despite knowing all of that.

I am still waiting for the RoI statement though, unless you are too busy ignoring that part by not quoting it.

[caervek]

I am still waiting for the RoI statement though, unless you are too busy ignoring that part by not quoting it.

The UK, RoI and EU are all opposed to a hard border between the RoI/UK.

The UK voted to leave the European Union in a referendum on 23 June 2016. Their withdrawal would effectively make the Republic of Ireland-Northern Ireland border an external EU border. However, the Irish and UK governments and the President of the European Council have stated that they do not wish for a hard border in Ireland, taking into account the historical and social "sensitivities" that permeate the island. In September 2016 the British Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis, stated that the UK government would not seek a return to a "hard border" between the UK and Republic of Ireland.

[Kiri]

The UK, RoI and EU are all opposed to a hard border between the RoI/UK.

Yes, no one wishes for it. That is precisely the point. That is why the EU seeks compromise. But if Britain rejects that compromise and goes for a no deal, then there is a need for a hard border. The RoI currently has full veto on Brexit talks precisely for that reason; unless it is satisfied with the border situation, talks do not continue to the next stage.

[caervek]

Really? The UK has an open border with the RoI because of their membership in the single market.

No, we have an open border with the RoI because we have a treaty in place between us for an open border, this was put in place 70 years before the single market was created. It was known by Brussels when they admitted both of us in '73, it was known by Brussels when they formed the EU and the single market in '93, and if they failed to consider the possibility of one of us leaving the EU that's their oversight not ours.

The EU really need to stop messing about and compromise on this if they want talks to progress.

[Acidbaron]

No, we have an open border with the RoI because we have a treaty in place between us for an open border, this was put in place 70 years before the single market was created. It was known by Brussels when they admitted both of us in '73, it was known by Brussels when they formed the EU and the single market in '93, and if they failed to consider the possibility of one of us leaving the EU that's their oversight not ours.

The EU really need to stop messing about and compromise on this if they want talks to progress.

You had a controlled border before the good friday agreement and the EU needs to do nothing, what leverage do you have again?

[Noradin]

Because if France find the idea of having an open border to NI/UK via the RoI is just unworkable for them they they can either lump it or close their border with RoI to fix their problem, they shouldn't expect other countries to solve their problem for them.

What problem?
They have existing treaties that address said issue.
Why would the wants of the UK be more important than existing treaties between France and the RoI? Delusional much?
RoI is not your vassal.

The EU knew full well when it agreed to treaties with the UK/RoI that we already had existing treaties which superseded the EU ones in the event or either of us withdrawing.

No.
No such treaties exist.
It is entirely the UK's problem that they navigated themselves into a situation where they have to go back on their word because of the mess they made of their treaties.
If you sell the same thing twice to different parties then that is on you, not on those parties who buyed from you.