Today's essential read - @gideonrachman on US-China tensions and ties, and whether we're heading towards a new cold war. It is particularly striking to me that the motivations of both towards the other are unclear - rivals, but in what ways? ft.com/content/7b809c…
To be read alongside this on how the pandemic has relatively boosted China's economic position, and therefore geopolitical confidence. ft.com/content/e29029…
So what exactly are the US (plus UK etc) concerned about with regard to China? Loss of economic power, China internal repression, China external threats, unfair economic competition? And what do they hope to achieve through any action?
Because if the US and EU are most concerned about China's economic competition then they have a way to do something about that together. Neither seem to make co-operation a priority though, so is this just a howl of anguish about loss of domination?
Perhaps the US needs to have a serious administration in order to have a serious discussion about China. Same with the UK. But the EU is serious and still doesn't have an answer other than turning inwards a bit more. Much more to consider...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Let us say the PM gets an EU deal. Immediately Farage says he has sold out the country. Reasonable to assume some ERG MPs follow, for example in pointing out the Northern Ireland protocol remains. Does the PM take them on? Big decision for the PM.
The gulf between the Brexit dialogue of absolute sovereignty and the intra-UK tensions of Scotland and Northern Ireland caused by the Internal Market Bill and other government actions is getting wider, and means big trouble ahead for the UK.
Not only does the rest of the world not recognise absolute UK Parliament sovereignty, the rest of the UK doesn't either. But it is a long way back for a populist English nationalist government to recognise internal and external interdependencies in trade or international law.
Obviously we're about to see whether the government will follow through on the most extreme Brexit interpretation, of no trade deal and renounce the Northern Ireland protocol, or will accept limitations of treaty. A real moment of truth far beyond trade deal or not.
Those who are surprised that excel is being used for important data processing jobs in public sector or big companies might perhaps spend some time working in middle levels in said organisations. This is entirely normal.
It might not be right, but I know of major government schemes deemed to be successful run entirely on excel. And don't ask about some of the systems used by major corporates to generate some of their information...
"Two thirds of our economy is trade" might sound impressive until you realise that this isn't far away from the global average. It really isn't a particularly meaningful measure.
"the answer is to be selling more of our products overseas" is not a new thought, but few companies or countries who want to do this would first put significant barriers in place to 50% of their overseas sales.
And what precisely is "a hub at the centre of trade networks around the world"? That is to assume we have some unique capability rather than just an economy with particular strengths and weaknesses like every other.
I wonder if even the PM and closest advisors know what he will say to von der Leyen today...
Anyway, on substance, this. Time for the PM to say yes or no to the deal on offer. Frankly the state aid constraints will be more symbolic than real, but a lot of Brexit is as a symbol of freedom, so...
Feels like a follow up needed to explain why provisions of a trade agreement are there if they have little substance - answer again is symbolic, FTAs are commitments to closer partnerships, that both sides are prepared to do more together.