2/ The argument is the threat of a chaotic No-Deal Brexit will push the EU to change its red line.
This is theoretically possible, but as a negotiator, you might want to ask yourself some questions to test if it's likely.
3/ Question 1:
"Have the stakeholders behind the red line indicated any flexibility?"
The stakeholders here are the Irish, but also EU leaders and their commitment to the integrity of the Single Market.
4/ Question 2:
"Are there signs of dissent among their coalition?"
If half the EU were strongly advocating watering down the backstop, holding out might give that faction time and ammunition to win the internal argument.
5/ Question 3:
"Is there a groundswell of popular support for changing the red line in the EU?"
Are there rallies being held? Are well-regarded voices on the news advocating for it? Are the newspapers full of 'change the backstop' op-eds by respected public intellectuals?
6/ Question 4:
"Are opposition parties making it a big issue in politics at the national level?"
The political cost for any government increases exponentially when they have a vocal opposition pushing a certain issue as a litmus test. Are they doing that?
7/ Question 5:
"Have any politicians of sufficient stature made averting No-Deal a central commitment or election promise?"
Again, this significantly increases the political cost to those politicians of allowing No-Deal to happen.
8/ Question 6:
"How vocal are business groups and are they pushing for the outcome the UK wants?"
Businesses are obviously concerned about the prospect of No-Deal, but are they actively pushing a renegotiation of the WA or changing of the backstop?
9/ I'm not an expert on EU politics or the EU zeitgeist, so I don't know the answers to those questions.
They are however the ones I'd ask before playing chicken with the EU by using the threat of No-Deal as leverage... and the ones EU negotiators will be asking in reverse. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If you're worried about inadvertently causing offense in the workplace, consider:
1⃣ Treating people with kindness and respect by default which encourages them to give you the benefit of the doubt.
2⃣ Not getting massively defensive or aggressive when someone raises an issue.
When people can see you're trying, and making a genuine effort, they are far more likely to be patient with you.
If you're an asshole, they are far more likely to see even inadvertent faux pas as a deliberate attack, dismissive thoughtlessness or calculated cruelty.
Learning to treat being pulled up on something you said that hurt someone's feelings as an opportunity for dialogue, rather than as a final and damning judgement on your character hard.
People were running around and borrowing the PM's authority without authorization for matters relating to an ongoing military operation and evacuation in a city actively falling to the Taliban?
You guys get that's not great, right?
There's literally a West Wing clip about this:
The @BBCNews story that quote is from is here, if you want to read it in context and in full.
2/ A narrative can be extremely powerful in determining what makes it into the media we consume and how it's framed.
There's a reason news stories around a particular theme seem to happen in clusters. Nothing for a year, then relentlessly one after another.
3/ As a general rule media organizations like stories that align with established narratives and those that are directly and shockingly in contrast to it.
What they don't like is a story that runs contrary to narrative, but only mildly. No one reads those.
David Frost should be explicit about what he's proposing here.
The maximally charitable (least Bolshevik) interpretation is that he wants to move the UK to a US-like model whereby most senior positions in the civil service are political appointees who resign after each election.
The less charitable interpretations are all too stupid to contemplate.
Is your woke purging going to mean you fire everyone with pronouns in their e-mail signature when Frost comes in as PM, then fire everyone without them a few years later when a Labour PM takes over?
If Lord Frost's premise is that policy can only be delivered by a civil service where all individuals fully align in their hearts with the ideology of the government of the day then you are going to need a very different model of governance to the one you've had for centuries.
As a Ukrainian, watching obvious Boris Johnson superfan accounts cynically deploy the looming re-invasion of my birth country as a talking point to try and save their boy is gross, and the desperation pathetic.
FAQ #1: "The UK response has been great, shut up!"
A: Yes, it's been good! Certainly better than Germany's. And all that despite taking place in the middle of this crisis so by your own admission, partygate hasn't impeded it. UK walking and chewing gum same time, no problem.
FAQ #2: "This is in fact media criticism, why aren't they reporting more about Ukraine?"
A: Unless you're sending this tweet from inside a trench northeast of Mariupol, you likely know about what's going on in Ukraine from the same media you claim isn't reporting it.
As a former negotiator who now teaches this stuff, I promise you it makes a difference when the Minister in charge is seeking warm working relations and a path to progress instead of social media acrimony and a pretext for trade war.