Any ambiguity on that point is very dangerous. It could lead us back to where we were back in 2016 and early 2017, when some were arguing that if a border were to emerge this would be the fault of the nasty EU. Or, at least, that it would be as much the fault of the EU as of HMG.
This completely fallacious argument could then be used be people whose real agenda is to get Ireland to leave the EU. Which is why I wrote this back in February 2017
irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2017…
irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2017…
The only way to avoid a hard border is for NI to effectively remain inside the CU and SM for goods. If it exits either, a hard border becomes necessary and there is nothing that anyone can do about that. This is as true now as it was last year.
After some early wobbles, the Irish political class and media has until now put the responsibility for avoiding a hard border where it belongs: on the shoulders of HMG. If they agree the backstop, there will not be a hard border.
But if HMG doesn't agree a backstop, and the UK crashes out without a deal, there will be a hard border. The only thing that IRL can do in that case is to make it clear that the backstop is an absolute condition for any future EU-UK trade deal.
Based on what we've seen over the past 2 years the EU26 will back us up on that. They have been rock-solid in their support for us thus far.
However, if we were now to do a 180 degree turn & argue that even if NI leaves the CU or SM for goods there should be no border anyway, we would presumably lose the political capital accumulated over the past 2 years. And there would be a border anyway.
It would be an own goal of astonishing proportions.
