The most galling thing about UK border and migration debate is how it simply ignored how the EU system's frontline states from Spain, Italy, Greece, Romania, Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia to Finland cushioned the rest of Europe including the UK from border security shocks
The two core varians of cakeism that have distorted UK migration and border debate to the extent even Labour does not frontally challenge are 1. That UK in imposing greater restrictions on migration from its closest labour markets will not suffer impacts on its own labour market
and...
2.That the UK could continue to freeride on the efforts of EU frontline states to manage Europe's border security after leaving the EU system without experiencing the adverse impact of being on the other side of the EU system's borders
The result of UK policy cakeism is 1. that UK society is drifting to a migration system that is incrementally being forced to open up much more to global and European migration as labour shortages bite even as UK politicians claim to be restricting migration. Not a healthy debate
and 2. The UK finds itself scrambling to help secure Europe's borders and stabilise its neighbourhood out of a realisation its security is intertwined with the EU's after all, with little influence over the EU's political and geoeconomic structures underpinning the European order
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
How Scholz through dithering and downright obstruction of efforts of other EU states to help Ukraine is undermining moves towards European strategic autonomy that are essential insurance in case of another phase of US weakness will go down as another German foreign policy fiasco
Even if economic and military setbacks change the nature of the Russian threat to stability challenge rather than direct military risk, Russia will still absorb European security resources as will problems around the Med. After 2024 there is no guarantee the US will help as much
Macron may be irritating in his style while the Italians are often driven by pragmatic self-interest more than idealism, but when it came down to arms deliveries for Ukraine both followed through on commitments without messing around. Contrast that to Olaf Scholz.
The entire Brexit project rests on assumptions about British voter behaviour and attitudes that looks increasingly dated. We're going to have journalists and analysts blindsided by developments in UK politics, again
Also the claims that the UK cannot go for a "Norway" option because of vaguely defined concepts of great power status ("we're not like the small states" etc) and then making vague proposals for closer relations that are a Norwayish reconvergence path are tiringly pointless
Well-placed sources around the Kremlin will deny there is any chance of a coup in Moscow until after Putin is wheeled out of Novo-Ogaryovo feet first.
Worth taking a look at what people with highly placed sources around the Kremlin were predicting before 24 February.
I don't think a coup is particularly likely near term, but the "highly placed sources in an authoritarian regime" genre needs to be viewed with substantial scepticism. Various factions, interest groups and institutional actors whose messaging needs to be treated with caution
It usually is not difficult to work out which contacts are speaking to which journalist in any system where a limited set of actors can provide a modicum of access. Those contacts will be entirely aware of who is monitoring messaging and what risks are involved in opening up
It's a really good piece that is well worth reading. Anyone interested in historical parallels and analogies will find a lot that is reminiscent of the late Tsarist military in the era of Tsushima and Tannenberg
As a piece, it is an excellent reminder that what shapes and defines the decisions states make about force structure and strategic posture is defined by strengths and weaknesses of a wider political system as well as how military culture shapes the worldview of an officer class
Particularly the extent to which a system heavily structured around conscription and mass armies yet aware of need for modernisation ends up making compromises that hamper effectiveness, because full reform would undermine structures on which regime patronage and legitimacy rely
Whether the decision has been made depends entirely on voters in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. And they can change their minds, which they often do
Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting loudly "THE DECISION HAS BEEN MADE" is usually a sign that it probably hasn't been
I don't think Rejoin is on the cards. But with polls and demographic trends among the electorate pointing in one trajectory, there is nothing more "political elite cut off from the public" then shouting the "decision has been made" as structural majorities shift