A few thoughts on @piris_jc useful comment about my linkedin.com/feed/update/ur… . "Both U.K. and EU agreed (...) that the three land borders betw U.K. and EU had to be fixed in WA not in Future Relations Treaty. Nothing new. Franklin please try to help and find solutions". 8 pts
As usual, tweets not adapted to such debate, but :
1) Even if this does not appear to JC, I AM looking for solutions, but from a different place. Preferably, these solutions should be (a) legal and (b) sustainable in the long term.
1) Even if this does not appear to JC, I AM looking for solutions, but from a different place. Preferably, these solutions should be (a) legal and (b) sustainable in the long term.
2) Legally, I note a deafening absence of justification from all usual suspects of the presence, for example, of provisions on geographical indications in WA. On land borders, agreement between chiefs is not valid against text Article 50, as we know.
Incidentally, this agreement does not concern borders themselves, but the way they are used in some EU policies (which is not at all the same). In fact, EU has identified topics of future relationship it deems essential and wants to introduce in WA in spite of A50.
3) Strategically, we know UK situation. Do we really want to provoke a deep long constitutional (territorial?) and economic crisis there, for topics that could be easily be settled elsewhere ? If this is for essential aspects of single market, we must, but nothing else.
4) Furthermore, all this will create very bad precedents for next uses of A50, and very bad narrative for various populists, who will underline endlessly bad faith of EU dark powers in application of their own text.
5) GFA important agreement but no immediate threat in transition period + EU keeps very strong pressure means on UK (especially if growth goes down) for next negotiation. + Ireland will still need to approve future relationship agreement.
6) Speaking about practical solutions, E-27 countries may very well adopt NOW a formal agreement commiting themselves to obtain complete respect of GFA in future relationship. Perfectly possible under A50, and no bad precedent.
7) Furthermore, we know there has been no debate about this at all in European Council. See excellent @alexebarker + @ArthurBeesley comment on backstop. @EU_Commission had its own orthodoxy discreetly validated (facilitated by UK gov usual nonsense). ft.com/content/73ac4a…
8) Other solutions certainly exist. The essential is for EU to remain legally and strategically coherent, and fair. Crisis must remain last resort option, especially in such dangerous straits. Look at the economy, immigration, Italy, US, Russia, WTO... 
