,
11 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Interesting commentary & piece by @KeohaneDan & @pmdfoster. It's indeed worthwhile wondering whether EU'd or would have had made a concession on a time limit. I'd have said it depends on whether it seemed conceivable that another solution could be found within the time limit.
Obviously already the starting point on such a assumption is critical. It depends on domestic debates on EU27 (especially IRE) and UK, but also whether the actors act rational in medium and long term. /2
From my perspective the main question'd b whether a long term solution can b found within x years which doesn't violate any EU red lines & satisfied (in this end state) Irish interests substantially. If this x lies within a proposed time period, there's a chance for agreement. /3
The current proposals would be, from UK side 2-3 years, and this would be considered as delusional. Nothing worth considering given that any technological solution would need to be developed from scratch and trialed. 15-20 years would be more realistic. /4
This time limit however is not sustainable from the side of Tories. It would be seen as an illegitimate constraint whose grounds are already seen as questionable (remember, large part of membership and hardliner believe NI border issue is a made up problem). /5
But even if u'd suggest 15-20 yrs, it requires UK 2 b perceived as an honest & transparent actor who invests substantial amount of sources over long term to find a solution. If u'd be on EU side, would u trust UK's political system 2 approach the topic like that? Me neither. /6
So we hopefully agree, that this ship already sailed and won't be back anytime soon. Second point of be the cost of opportunity. Why agreeing on 15-20 yrs with a questionable and slightly hostile actor who can be forced? /7
What do I mean with forced: Well, at least in political science and economics there is a broad agreement that no deal would create substantial shocks on several dimensions which may easily lead to a state crisis and possibly disintegration. /8
Assuming UK acts remotely rational in terms of self-preservation, it is conceivable that under the shock itself you will find new or surprising willingness to sign anything what helps you to stabilise your position. Voila, WA 2.0 is born (the one needed to unlock mini deals). /9
This would create, in relatively short termed period of time the solution EU is looking for. UK may be angry but it's a regional power while EU plays powerwise in a different league. Who cares when the dwrf next to you is angry, it has nowhere to go without getting more pain. /10
The later is especially advantageous because it doesn't need much to create it, just one big actor willing to block the deal or any extension & you've the no deal pressure. While former needs trust, conceivable detailed plan & willingness - none of it is there or likely. 11/11
