burleigh3_TOLGA AKMEN_AFP_Getty Images_theresa may leo varadkar

Der Brexit gegen die irische Frage

Nov 7, 2018 Michael Burleigh

LONDON – Am Tag des Brexits – also am 29. März 2019 – wird das Freibeuterschiff HMS Buccaneer Britannia auf der Suche nach den Reichtümern der „Anglosphäre“ in See stechen. Einen Haken hat die Sache allerdings: irgendwer hat vergessen, den Anker zu lichten, der weiterhin fest in Irland fixiert bleibt.

Überraschend kommt das nicht. Von allen mir bekannten Euroskeptikern unter den konservativen Politikern hat kein einziger Nordirland jemals erwähnt, von dem souveränen Land südlich davon ganz zu schweigen. Die Brexiteers haben nur ihr Streben nach parlamentarischer Souveränität und die Befreiung von dem supranationalen „Superstaat“ in Brüssel im Sinn.

Diese engstirnige Sicht der Dinge könnte einfach Ausdruck von Unwissenheit sein. Sogar frühere Brexit-Gegner wie Karen Bradley, nunmehr Ministerin für Nordirland, gestand kürzlich: „[…] zum Zeitpunkt meiner Amtsübernahme habe ich manche der tief sitzenden und tief verwurzelten Probleme, mit denen Nordirland zu tun hat, nicht verstanden.“ Mit anderen Worten: noch bis vor Kurzem hat sie sich für eine der zentralen Fragen der britischen Geschichte im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert nicht interessiert.

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, topical collections, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more. All for less than $9 a month.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 18 Comments on this article

Andrew (Andy) Crow Nov 18, 2018

" if the Scots want to become an anonymous tiny country reliant on the tender mercies of Brussels, England would be the last country to force them to change their mind. "

It would be very welcome if either of the Westminster parties viewed Scotland in that way. Curiously though they do not and both are adamant in their desire to hold Scotland in thrall. I wonder what they know that you don't ?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Andrew (Andy) Crow Nov 18, 2018

"Many of them [the Brexiteers] would rather lose Northern Ireland and Scotland than forgo Brexit."

This sums up the 'Little Englander' mindset perfectly. Brexit is first and foremost an English bid for independence, and many of the difficulties stem from an assumption that the Scots and Northern Irish populations (and their resources) can be dragged along as chattels. Quite irrespective of their stated preferences in the referendum to remain in the EU.

An EU border where the present England/Scotland border runs would solve many problems (It might also follow the England/Wales border including Wales in the EU).

This would ensure English isolation within the EU (rather as Switzerland stands as an island within the EU bloc) which would seem to meet the requirements of the Brexiteers desire for independence.

Quite how Londoners would respond to their preference to remain being ignored, would be something the English would have to deal with for themselves.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Nov 16, 2018

Michael Burleigh highlights the Brexiteers’ folly when they voted to take Britain out of the European Union in June 2016 – they totally overlooked the contentious issue of the Irish border. Now they are stuck in the “backstop” plan for the 500 km border between Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, and Ireland, which will remain in the EU. The “backstop” is an insurance policy that Ireland wants to ensure the border remains completely open to trade, people, and services in the event of no deal.
The issue is so intricate because, under the 1998 Good Friday agreement, the border between NI and Ireland, once hardened by military checkpoints, has melted away to reduce sectarian tensions. The return of a “hard” border is exactly what some fear Brexit will do, unless Britain remains part of the EU’s single market and a customs union - an option that Theresa May ruled out at the beginning of the withdrawal process.
Brexiteers reject the terms and want to leave the single market and customs union, saying the EU will only allow a country to stay in the customs union and single market, if it obeys all the EU rules and laws. Besides Britain would not be able to enter into new free trade deals with other countries on its own initiative. Moreover, being a member of the single market a country has to make budget contributions and accept freedom of movement.
Initially the EU proposed that, unless other solutions were found, NI would remain in a customs union with the EU and the single market, when Britain leaves the bloc. The purpose was to ensure that there would be no “hard border” between Ireland and NI after Brexit. This drew a rebuke from May, describing the proposal as a threat to Britain’s “constitutional integrity” – a EU attempt to “annex” NI.
May had been working on a fallback plan for retaining the soft Irish border. Her headache is that if NI stays within the bloc’s customs union and single market, while Britain leaves, it will create a new economic frontier down the middle of the Irish Sea. People in NI want to be part of the UK. And Belfast’s hardline Democratic Unionist Party is a junior partner of the Torry government. DUP leader, Arlene Foster, said she would not accept a plan under which NI would have different economic rules than the rest of UK.
Brexiteers – dwelling in “fantasies of English importance” – are adamant about leaving the customs union, saying a membership would only betray their voters. They also fear that a plan to prevent border checks might keep the UK tied indefinitely to European customs rules, preventing it from striking free trade deals elsewhere. Even if there would be “no regulatory barriers” in the Irish sea, the problem still remains insoluble, unless the UK struck a deal which involved remaining in the single market and the customs union, without having a say.
The author says: “English Brexiteers have given no serious thought to the Irish question, nor even to the likelihood that crashing out of the EU might take the UK back to the dark ages. Many of them would rather lose Northern Ireland and Scotland than forgo Brexit.” It is indeed ludicrous to believe in “a fanciful world of limitless possibility, based on a national mythology featuring Sir Francis Drake, Sir Walter Raleigh, the British Raj, and standing ‘alone’ in 1940.”
Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn supports the idea of Britain’s remaining in a customs union with the EU. That would ease the Irish border problem, and create pressure for May to follow suit. But to do so would invite the wrath of her party’s diehard Brexieers, who might then challenge her leadership, plunging the country into a constitutional crisis.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Nov 18, 2018
  
  I think you exaggerate the length of the Irish border; I believe it's only 200Km, but it does have 137 crossing points, apparently, without taking into consideration the option of simply walking across fields........ so the points you make are not really altered one jot.
  
  For as long as both a land border on the island of Ireland is unacceptable and a sea border in the Irish Sea is unacceptable the issue is beyond resolution.
  
  The entire Brexit fantasy is based on the phrase which was bandied about a great deal in the early days after the referendum: the English want to have their cake and to eat it too.
  
  There are only two rational outcomes for the UK: one is for a 'no deal' to be declared and for that to mean that we revert to status quo ante, and set about an entirely new negotiation process to establish amenable adjustments to the UK/EU relationship.
  
  Or, secondly to accept that England shall divest itself of its colonies in Scotland and Ireland (and perhaps Wales too) and they will remain in their present relationship to the EU leaving England free to sink or swim on its own merits.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jocelyn Pixley Nov 15, 2018

From another former 'UK' colony, early Australian settlers always knew they were not dealing with 'England' or even 'London' but the three powerhouses in London, the Bank of England, the City and Treasury (or via that, the Colonial Office); as well, the Red Coats that Indigenous guerrillas beat for years. And, because many of the settlers were Irish, Chartists, Trade Unionists and feminists, the vast bulk of Australians made a lot of fun of the so-called aristocracy of the troika: "taking the Mickey" lives on today among Australian- Chinese, Italians, Vietnamese (etc.) and even what used to be the cringing upper classes. Now we have august think-tanks which joked at Boris Johnson's fantasies when he visited Sydney. Of note also to Ireland, Australia's settlement cost the London troika a lot of money, and 'responsible government' came long before Ireland's messy and brutal kind of armistices. The troika meantime, never envisioned a formal federation so, strictly speaking, Brexit was a mere plebiscite, not a referendum, that is, to break up the UK. Referenda in federations are never a 50:50 win-lose vote, they need about 2/3 and, in Australia, there is compulsory turn-out and we enjoy voting (on Saturdays).
I sympathise with the critique that the Brexiteers are in a "fanciful world" of self-superiority a long way from the reality about these privileged people; Cameron's side included.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Christine Constable Nov 9, 2018

I think the truth is so few in England really have any interest in Northern Ireland, most of the problems were in fact caused by the Scottish and most English people are bemused by the ongoing "troubles". Recent polls reflect that the vast majority of English people would gladly be rid of the Northern Irish issue and few of us have any issue with that province re-joining Southern Ireland.

I also think the author's concern about Scotland is misplaced. The English are more concerned about securing benefits for England and retaining English sovereignty, for many of us in England Britain doesn't really exist, clearly Labour under Corbyn wants to see Northern Ireland go as well and if the Scots want to become an anonymous tiny country reliant on the tender mercies of Brussels, England would be the last country to force them to change their mind.

I think most Scots can see what a damn good deal they have within the UK, the failure of RBS demonstrated that Scotland is a weak small nation if it went alone and probably would not have many of the industries it currently has, including the finance industry without the back up of the UK, but if it wants to separate let it be their decision, it would simply mean there would be more revenues for England as Scotland is a drag on UK public expenditure. Relocating the many government jobs (which were put there for job creation purposes) from Scotland back to England and closing airbases and ship yards will bring much needed economic regeneration to England.

It is important to remind ourselves WHY the people of the UK voted to leave the EU, because only in understanding that and the context of that decision can people judge whether the so called "Brexiteers" clearly understand what they are doing:

The UK left for the following reasons:

1) No one in the UK had ever consented to passing national sovereignty to Brussels, there has never been a vote of the people of the UK and to many, Brussels does not command respect in its continuing push for more control over the sovereign affairs of the UK, the people do not respect it.
2) Brussels has shown itself to be dumb, deaf and blind to serious structural problems in Europe and the differing economic strengths of its members. Its wish to micro manage the affairs of 28 quite different countries, it cannot flex sufficiently to meet the differing needs of the Continent and it insists "one size fits all" which as we know in the real world is utter nonsense.
3) The Euro was so poorly established without the necessary checks and balances and debt management of a central currency. It has driven a number of countries into dire problems without having any ability to help those countries deal with their dilemma, the EU have let these countries suffer alone and the disgraceful treatment of the Greeks is a stain on the EU and one the UK abhors. Sink or swim is the view from the ECB. Brussels eschewed UK involvement on the establishment of the Euro sulking that the UK would not join, we would not join because the whole establishment of the Euro was flawed and unworkable, but the EU ignored our complaints and now finds itself in a burning building with no way out. Target 2 is the next financial explosion to hit the EU and could well take France and Germany with it.

4) The EU despite pressure to change has very little credible democracy within it. Even during these Brexit negotiations, the key players Junker; Barnier; Tusk are unelected making decisions over people who have never given permission for them to make policy on their behalf. There is a massive democracy gap in the EU. While the EU waffles on about its values, many of us stand and wonder what exactly are those values, certainly they are nothing to do with democracy and therein lies the fear, that the EU is simple the USSR reincarnate, Central Planning, no consent and imposing its will from the centre with menaces and no accountability.

5) The UK sought to meet with the EU and Cameron wanted to seek flexibility on key parts of the so called "four freedoms" which are crippling our country. In just under 20 years the UK has had to admit 4 million European migrants which have caused massive changes in our society which were never managed well, by any politician on either side of the channel. Spirallng house prices; overdevelopment and overcrowding on our small island; massive pressure on the NHS; Education and Welfare were never properly considered when the EU made its unilateral demands that if the UK wanted to remain in (what was the EEC) then became the EU and our door was jammed open to a mass influx of freeloaders and economic refugees, fleeing the poverty and failure of the EU's lame ducks.

The correct balance of mature economies joining the Eu was disregarded as the EU rushed headlong into mopping up as much of Europe and the old soviet bloc as it possibly could to entrench its own designs on territory and power, and (frankly) to hell with the consequences to existing European peoples.

6)The EU's central core of civil servants are arrogant, out of touch, over paid and the wasteful operation of the EU has forced many people to lose trust and faith in that institution. The rise in so called "populist" parties should be seen for what it truly is, a kick back against undemocratic elites who presume to govern the peoples of Europe without their confidence or consent. Similarly the wholesale dismantling of national states and national sovereignty, whilst telling lies to the people that the things they value are being protected when in fact they are being discarded has undermined greatly the appetite for what the EU has become.

Rather than accepting that the EU must change, becoming more responsive; more democratic; more able to be flexible to the various needs of the myriad of nation states now trapped in its gravitational pull, it ignores the calls to change, and prefers to pretend that what is in fact needed is not change, but MORE EUROPE....more controls from the centre; more interference; more bullying; and more harassment ....to what end many of us ask? The EU is on a destination to become a country called Europe yet few of its passengers actually want to go there.

Brexit is nothing more than the cry, on behalf of a suffering Europe that things need to change. The fact Macron said he would never give the French the chance to vote on leaving the EU says much about his concern that France too (given the chance) would FREXIT, along with them Italy is spoiling for a fight, and the VISIGRAD Countries would probably also leave given half a chance. You would think the elites in the EU would be thinking "something is wrong here"? But no, they carry on as if everything is just fine and dandy, only a civil servant in an ivory tower would think that. Get into the real world!!

If all the EU has to offer Europe is a prison, from which former sovereign states are not able to leave without massive economic damage, then the EU has failed in what (supposedly) it set out to do, promoting peace and democracy. As it is few countries want to have thrust upon them "one size fits all" and an open door immigration system and by the EU failing to listen and change the EU is doomed to alienate country after country as others head for the door.

What is needed is for the EU to take the Brexit vote deadly seriously and use it as a platform for serious change. Offering those countries who want to retain their national sovereignty a relationship which is mutually respectful and constructive in trade and security terms and for those countries who are happy to dissolve their sovereignty and merge it with an inner core of European nations let them do that, but to force everyone down the same path is strategic suicide and only a theoretician, completely out of touch with the people would come up with this idea.

As we approach 100 years after the first world war Britain points out (correctly) it owes the European Continent nothing, we paid our dues on the battlefields of the Somme to liberate Brussels; Holland and France and we paid those dues twice and will nearly a trillion pounds in EU support. The dialogue with the UK is not a dialogue with Theresa May, it is with 65 million wealthy honourable people and a failure of the EU to give the UK the deal she deserves and always wanted (we only ever joined the EEC I would remind readers) will alienate a whole nation and will cause long term damage in relationships across the continent. The British will not accept blackmail and servitude if two world wars taught Europe anything it was that the British will not be cowed, and if Tusk; Junker and Barnier want to play with fire let them, in the end it will be Europe's loss as we can already see. The Brexiteers want to preserve Democracy and Sovereignty and there is absolutely nothing populist or reactionary in that.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Nov 18, 2018
  
  " if the Scots want to become an anonymous tiny country reliant on the tender mercies of Brussels, England would be the last country to force them to change their mind. "
  
  It would be very welcome if either of the Westminster parties viewed Scotland in that way. Curiously though they do not and both are adamant in their desire to hold Scotland in thrall. I wonder what they know that you don't, Christine ?
  
  When you make the Brexit case you make the case for Scottish independence simply by changing the names in your argument.
  
  Over and over again the hypocrisy of English exceptionalism is exposed in the Brexit case.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Robert Coleman Nov 11, 2018
  
  A comment directly from Brexit headquarters. Only Brexit is failing on all fronts and many of its backers are are disappearing into the woodwork or busy responding to police investigations and civil suits (and in the case of a major civil suit, apparently conceding the plaintiff's case in full). Brexit is a fraud and an assault on reason no matter how well you try to dress it up. It is imperative now that this attempted coup be foiled.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Desmond Johnson Nov 8, 2018

"comment has been deleted"
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Alex Tuz Nov 8, 2018

"Go on home British soldiers, go on home. Haven't got you home of your own?...For eight hundred years we fought you without fear, and we will fight you for eight hundreds more."
- P. Kamath Nov 9, 2018
  
  Sir: Permit me to say that your knowledge of history is pretty faulty. You need to brush up much more 😁!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Desmond Johnson Nov 8, 2018
  
  "comment has been deleted"
  - Alex Tuz Nov 15, 2018
    
    whatever, occupiers will always be occupiers.
    - Desmond Johnson Nov 15, 2018
      
      "comment has been deleted"
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
reginald Bowler Nov 7, 2018

"Brexiteers have given no serious thought to what withdrawal from the European Union will mean for Northern Ireland and its relationship with Great Britain."

What, really? It's written into recently-enacted legislation, all over the place. You should look it up, it's in the public domain.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Nov 18, 2018
  
  Saying it twice doesn't make it true.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
reginald Bowler Nov 7, 2018

"Brexiteers have given no serious thought to what withdrawal from the European Union will mean for Northern Ireland and its relationship with Great Britain."

What, really? It's written into recently-enacted legislation, all over the place. You should look it up, it's in the public domain.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Nov 18, 2018
  
  Saying it twice doesn't make it true.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/wFPIet7de

Der Brexit gegen die irische Frage

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Into the Brexit Labyrinth

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Der Brexit gegen die irische Frage

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification