Why is this striking? After all, UK is open-minded Global Britain.
Well, I recall European EU (trade) experts being kept at arms-length from advising HMG after the #Brexit referendum.
For fear they might be double-agents advising the Other Side. Only Brits Allowed!
/2
Of course, European EU experts might have had some useful lessons to share about negotiating with the EU, which could've benefited HMG. But hey, that ship has sailed.
Apparently, an exception is made for Anglosphere Aussies.
/3
And of course, the UK should solicit advise from wherever it comes. So good for them!
But I remember distinctly a conversation with a very senior Australian official, back in 2017. We were discussing how Australia was making its trade policy expertise available to UK...
/4
Guess what that official said...
"We're happy to teach & advise the Brits about trade negotiations. We'll know they're trade policy better than they'll know it themselves. And we'll use it to our advantage in our bilateral talks. We'll negotiate with them early on and win."
/5
And lo' and behold, Australia is among the first bilateral FTA's Liz Truss is negotiating.
Good luck with the agricultural chapter!
/6
The ideology of Brexit is such that those in the Anglosphere are considered the UK's newest BFF's and the EU are the villains.
Unfortunately, trade policy doesn't work that way.
/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We have a new Dutch 🇳🇱 coalition agreement!
Here are some highlights with an international/ EU dimension:
Defence
- Continued military, political & financial support for #Ukraine
- Legally enshrine 2% defence spending
- Support for NL & European defence industry
/1
Migration
- NL will seek opt-out for (parts of) European asylum/migration policy, and will discuss setting up mini-Schengen’s in times of crisis
- NL will work with EU members to externalise migration policy to 3rd countries
/2
Migration (cont'd)
- NL will seek limits to freedom of movement for new EU members (i.e. same thing that happened in 2004)
- Various measures to dissuade migration, including fewer international students in Bachelors programmes, except technical studies
/3
1) EU's timing was totally off, at least if it wanted a positive response frm London. Perhaps BXL's timing had more to do w VDL extending a hand to the UK at the end of her term. In any case it had little to do with political realities in London
/1
This suggests either VDL came up with the idea herself, or she was poorly advised by @PedroSerranoEU's team in London (which I don’t believe as they are highly competent)
Is there another option?
/2
@PedroSerranoEU .@anandMenon1 suggests here that the Commission wanted to pre-empt bilateral efforts by individual member-states
Plausible. Tho I haven’t heard many Europeans talk about bilateral deals with the UK on visas and youth mobility (aside from the French)
/3 theguardian.com/politics/2024/…
"As a result of the staggering implementation failures of the past six years, we have so far borne the costs of leaving the EU - the majority of which were the result of a choice by vindictive European protectionists...
/2
"...rather than the necessary outcome of leaving - while only enjoying a small fraction of the possible benefits."
Interesting perspective: trade barriers r blamed on 'European protectionists' instead of the logical outcome of leaving an internal market. But OK.
Or rather, I read @stephenfry’s highly enjoyable version “Troy”
Here are a couple of points with some relevance to today’s war in #Ukraine
A short 🧵(with some classical art)
/1
Who is to blame for the war, and at what point did it become inevitable?
Was it the Trojan abduction of Helen, the judgement of Paris, the lottery Odysseus organised, Paris’ and Antimachus' undermining of the Greek ultimatum?...
/2
Or was it the challenge Troy presented to Agamemnon’s hegemony as “king of men”....
... or the Greek pursuit of Troy’s spoils?
In the case of Russia vs Ukraine, we also see multiple reasons being debated, some more realistic than others.
If the West doesn’t want to get directly involved in Ukraine, it has two options:
-Arm Ukraine
-Use economic tools of coercion (sanctions)
We are doing the first. But the second remains tricky.
Some thoughts on economic sanctions.
A thread. 🧵
/1
If you are serious about using sanctions as a tool, you also accept harming your own economy.
Imposing sanctions ALWAYS means striking a balance between the amount of economic pain you are willing to absorb versus the amount of economic pain you can inflict on the other.
/2
Examples.
Personal sanctions are relatively painless; their impact is also limited.
Prohibiting sales of luxury goods is bad for oligarchs and bad for LVMH, but probably won’t lead to a change in behaviour either.