The narrative is engrossing, all the while ensuring his points are neatly numbered. Looking forward to reading the rest. Snips in this thread are homemade translations and not from the English version, which will be out in October, I think. #Barnier amazon.com/grande-illusio…
Was the UK so enveloped in ideological heat and nostalgia, so parched for what seemed a convenient out from economic stagnation that they desperately grasped at this mirage of a solution? 
I received long letters from both Sabine Weyand and Stefaan De Rynck as thanks for the art books I sent. The fact that they took the time to do it speaks volumes.
Did the UK fully understand the consequences? I’ve often wondered. Should the government have informed the public of these consequences? Perhaps the parliamentary system is poorly equipped to effectively scrutinise these or sufficiently protect the people’s interests.
There was a sense of urgency post referendum, as if after forty odd years the UK can’t stand to be in the EU not even a day longer. But did anyone ask those in charge, in light of the complexity of the process - “why the rush?” or even better, “why are ‘they’ in such a rush?”
The unity of the 27 must have been quite unexpected to the UK.
Keeping the peace
Unfortunately, the extent of the Brexit mandate was never clearly defined so anything agreed on behalf of the citizens cannot be said to be an overreach. Accountability is non-existent.
How long will it take for the UK to come to the realisation that “Global Britain” is founded on misunderstandings of sovereignty and global trade norms?
a. Ten Years
b. Twenty Years
c. Never
a. Ten Years
b. Twenty Years
c. Never
One thing I wish the UK would understand about how the EU negotiating machine operates:
“Step by step we are reaching agreement with the British on all issues. They often come to our positions, which are seriously prepared and legally backed up. And that is what counts.”
“Step by step we are reaching agreement with the British on all issues. They often come to our positions, which are seriously prepared and legally backed up. And that is what counts.”
“It is not about challenging the British institutional order. It is about technical, practical, concrete controls…”
Their purpose is to protect European interests, not to negotiate mini-deals with the UK.
To survive in the UK post-referendum parliament requires a certain level of ruthlessness and arm-twisting ability that May didn’t possess. She fought in her limited capacity to not completely sell the country off- perhaps that’s the reason Johnson is in her place as the PM today.
Monitoring state aid compliance and ensuring level-playing field might be a continuous challenge. The Subsidy Control Bill appears aligned with the EU’s but what if actual adherence is much more lax than what is in the bill? #StateAid #Dumping
“Negotiating is not just looking at each other. It is looking together in the same direction.”
Political filibustering
Unprofessional, egoistical theatrics have no place in trade negotiations. If not for our chosen representative, could we have had a better deal?
Quo vadis?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
