,
26 tweets,
7 min read
Read on Twitter
I wonder why on Earth you invite a guy who has little to know idea about EU politics while his sole credentials build upon being deeply partisan. Somewhere between poor journalism and extremely misleading idiocracy.
I mean Harwood is clever, it looks incredibly professional, almost 'House of Cards' alike. An audience whose understanding of politics doesn't go beyond an infantile and simplified Machiavelism maybe impressed. He will score with that.
But beyond getting a campaigning message across ('Boris brings as a good deal' or 'Boris has a good plan') it's plain nonsense as any scholar in EU politics (also in British politics, but I'll come to that) will tell you.
1) He clearly doesn't understand that EU doesn't attach the same meaning to 'negotiation' as UK does. For EU it's an negotiation how to address already existing obligations, it's not a negotiation on which obligations UK should have in future.
2) While both (UK and EU) don't like no deal, EU can clearly live with it. The pain is localised primarily in UK and there will be no intention to open any talks w/o that those obligations are addressed (the red lines of EU can be seen as the absolute minimum standard).
And given that those obligations are seen as, well, 'obligation' they will get really hostile when they don't get it. And provided the deep divisions and possibility of multidimensional crisis, they have every incentive to amplify the pain whatever the cost.
And this btw is just the EU side of that 'game of chickens' (between British tricycle and EU tank). But there is another dimension. If you are interested you may want to follow @rdanielkelemen @simonjhix @BrigidLaffan to get a taste how EU works.
But there is another dimension: Ireland. They are granted a de facto veto over the whole WA. So how is that? Well, it turns out that UK is not the only one who can efficiently campaign.
Essentially they managed to present their position of the necessity for an open border w/o any new infrastructure as a matter of national relevance similar as SM integrity to EU. This has been understood, not just among political elites but also in the different EU27 electorates.
And bullying a small member state fighting for a matter of vital national interest will not go down well. That's likely to end up in a PR cluster*ck for EU. This is btw the reason why UK is seen as a mixture between madman and bully, it threatens a EU member state.
Campaigning-wise EU can't wish for a better opportunity to polish their tormented reputation: defending a small member state against a hostile foreign power. For Ireland it's even easier.
There's no sign that no deal is seen as worse than a deal w/o backstop. There is absolutely no majority for that, it's a broad consent & other than some Leavers in UK they've no delusions on how bad no deal'd be. So bullying doesn't work it's likely to reinforce IRE's position.
If you are interested on Irish politics, here are some suggestions: @OxfordDiplomat @Muinchille @KeohaneDan @MatthewOToole2 @DenisMacShane @timoconnorbl
So let's now come to the British side. I wrote in the past several tweets why I believe that no deal would be worse than many people predict. Long story in short: no, I don't think no deal as such would deliver an economic armageddon.
It's the combination of factors & events likely to occur if no deal has the anticipated bad economic consequences (likely more on the scale of crisis in 2008 than Berlin siege h/t @theoryashistory). The deep divisions are likely to amplify the pain & by itself create new crises.
So which divisions am I talking about: Socio-Political Divisions in GB (anywhere v nowhere or urban v rural or socio-liberal v socio-conservative). Those divisions are already deep and likely to increase and align along the lines of Remainer-Leaver fault line.
Socio-Cultural divisions in NI: Nationalists/Republicans v Unionists. This division has been always there but the likely implications for NI - economically and symbolically could once more lead to.radicalisation and violence.
National divisions: Mainly SCO v ENG, devolution or Scottish interests have been fully ignored during the negotiations - mainly perceived as bullying and disfranchising. SNP couldn't have wished for more.
Another fault line is between State and Politics (mainly Conservatives): Civil servants are under attack and undermined. Mistakes which were caused by 'political masters' have been put on them and are likely to be put on them in future.
It also seems that advises are ignored and that they are actively undermined in their work (remember Rogers? or the current leaks?). So question her would be what awaits us in a really bad economic crisis which is likely to have it's opening with an infrastructural clusterf*ck.
What I mean here is that you will have very likely manifestations of infrastructural problems due to lack of no deal preparations, too high expectations and strained resources. Miscommunication and alienation between Civil Service and Politics will make it much worse.
On that matter you may want to follow @APHClarkson who has raised those risks on several occasions.
But there is USA you cry? Just have a deep, hard look on the political system in USA: Any deal will need majorities Trump doesn't have. He can provide comforting words, but beyond that... well.
And beyond that: Why are you so sure that he is a) long enough in office to get this great deal done and b) that there will be a majority in HoC for such a deal and c) that the deal is done within few months or very few years rather than 5+years?
For that you may want to follow people with actual trade negotiation experience as @GuitarMoog or @DmitryOpines. Long story in short: Congrats Newsnight, instead of informing you help misleading the public...
Here another good take on this guy, this time from the angle of 'is he even a journalist?':
