This is a subscriber-only article
The dismissal of the Northern Ireland secretary, Julian Smith, by UK prime minister Boris Johnson in last week’s cabinet reshuffle, attracted expressions of regret both north and south of the border. Smith had by all accounts worked hard to restore a functioning executive at Stormont and had impressed civil society campaigners on a range of issues with his commitment to Northern Ireland.
His successor, Brandon Lewis, has effectively resiled from the UK’s withdrawal agreement with the European Union in his first major statement on assuming office.
Trouble is, this is not what it says in the withdrawal agreement
Lewis declared: “We are absolutely clear. As a UK government, we will not be having a border down the Irish Sea.”
Trouble is, this is not what it says in the withdrawal agreement, now signed, sealed and delivered, the basis on which the UK finally departed the EU just three weeks ago on 31 January.
The agreement provides that Northern Ireland will not have the same status as Britain: it will remain part of the UK customs area but will enjoy full access to the EU’s single market, facilitating an open border with the Republic.
The withdrawal negotiations covered just three key issues
It cannot have both an open border with the Republic and another with Britain. Whether this was the best outcome is academic at this stage, though the deal eventually agreed dismayed many in the unionist community.
The withdrawal negotiations covered just three key issues, the financial settlement, the status of EU nationals in the UK and of British people in Europe, and the Northern Ireland border.
His dismissal of the agreement’s provisions regarding the Northern Ireland border has provoked unconcealed irritation in Brussels
The deal has been done, approved by the European and British parliaments, is now a binding international treaty and the legal basis for the UK’s future relationship with Europe, including the upcoming talks on a free trade agreement. It is inconceivable that Lewis is unfamiliar with its contents.
His dismissal of the agreement’s provisions regarding the Northern Ireland border has provoked unconcealed irritation in Brussels and a swift rebuke from Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator.
Credibility
EU leaders will naturally wonder whether the UK is a credible negotiating partner – what other components of the withdrawal agreement are regarded as non-binding? It is not possible to exit the EU while a component of the territory of the withdrawing state is simultaneously in the UK’s single market and in the EU’s single market.
It will be difficult to implement, and it will be necessary to minimise frictions between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK
This was clear before the referendum and must be clear to Lewis. Brexit means Brexit, to coin a phrase, and there will be frictions to trade between the UK and Europe one way or the other.
There had to be some special arrangement for Northern Ireland and one was eventually arrived at.
It will be difficult to implement, and it will be necessary to minimise frictions between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. But Lewis has chosen to deny that the problem exists, through ignoring the solution agreed and now enshrined in treaty.
Reneging on any aspect of the withdrawal treaty is a breach of international law
It would be difficult to imagine a more emphatic route to undermining the basis of trust that will be required when the trade talks start next month.
Reneging on any aspect of the withdrawal treaty is a breach of international law, the action of a state gone rogue and something the United Kingdom has never done in modern times.
The consequences for Ireland could include an attempt by the UK to go back to the hard border approach, or a failure to agree any free trade agreement with the EU and the disruption that would imply for east-west trade.
This would mean tariffs, quotas, SPS checks, problems for the land-bridge to Europe across the UK, as well as trouble on the border.
Free trade agreements
There is a more immediate consequence for the UK itself. As well as facing a difficult and time-constrained negotiation with the EU, the UK must replace the many EU free trade agreements around the world whose benefits run out when the transition period ends next December.
These potential counterparties will be watching with great interest
Johnson has set great store on new agreements to be negotiated in addition to these roll-overs, especially with the US. These potential counterparties will be watching with great interest to see if the UK approach includes breaches of treaties on which the ink is barely dry.
If Lewis speaks for the government, and there has been no walking back of his remarks, the UK is not a credible negotiating partner for anyone else, not just for the EU.
There are adults in the room, in the UK civil service. Unfortunately, they appear to be having little influence on ministers
There is a benign interpretation, namely that chaos rules in the UK cabinet, that this is all just pre-fight posturing got up to please the Brexiteer press, and that Johnson will eventually fold and accept whatever terms are necessary to minimise the damage of a no-deal Brexit to the UK economy. There are adults in the room, in the UK civil service. Unfortunately, they appear to be having little influence on ministers.
SHARING OPTIONS: