If you'd like a very simple take-away of why this has gone belly-up (and bellies were much in focus last night), then focus on trust
1/
The root cause of the major problems in these negotiations has been that neither side trusts the other all that much
2/
The UK political debate has long been coloured by the suspicion that there is some nefarious agenda behind European integration, aided by a more general distrust of grand visions
3/
What better way to tie up the week than with a run-through of pacta sunt servanda?
A short thread, with pictures
Thanks to @Cardwell_PJ & Therese O'Donnell @UniStrathclyde for their help on this (any errors will be mine)
1/
As a bit of context, PSS is a basis of customary international law, and a cornerstone of the Vienna Convention: without it, the whole treaty-making business really has no point at all
2/
It's important to highlight that PSS carries implications, not least that states are free to enter treaties and to act freely elsewhere, but it's on them to only enter into commitments they can keep
Several points to note:
- The problem areas are the same they've always been (LPF, fish, governance and law enforcement)
- Round 6 was the first of the accelerated programme, so reason to make +ve sounds
- intermittent +ve sounds away from the big problems
3/
So we're back to the basic conundrum of the UK position in the Future Relationship talks: what are they trying to achieve?
1/
The economics would seem to point to securing as much preservation of existing ties with the EU, but the politics pulls in the other direction (certainly for this government)
2/
HMG has always talked about wanting a deal, and as Barnier noted again today, it was the UK that made a lot back in June about accelerating and intensifying talks to help secure that
3/
So yesterday I got canned for an interview because the presenter felt the Dublin Regulation was too complicated to get their head around (no names, no pack drill)
Let's see if we can cover the main points in the simplest form known to man: a short Twitter thread
1/
Key point 1: Dublin is about which state decides on asylum claims, not the standards for those claims. UK (like almost every state in world) accepts standards in the UN Refugee Convention. That has been constant (and will be so, even after transition ends)
2/
Key point 2: Dublin exists because asylum-seekers were bouncing around the EU: not good for anyone. Hence the notion that a decision by one EU member on your application would be a decision for all members
3/