#RoadToBrexit as a daydream

Undoubtedly the Manson House speech of the Prime Minister Theresa May has many virtues, offering constructive proposals for Article 50 agreement.  In general it is also attempts to appeal to common sense of the EU leaders, and is reflecting an intense search for the best possible new formula for matching interests of both parties, instead of fitting into old EU dogmas of ‘four freedoms’. May’s vision of the basis of post-Brexit engagement is orientated towards future: robotics and artificial intelligence, the new technologies and most of all the British genius, which brought the nation to the forefront of the Digital Revolution. But can this dazzling and dynamic new engagement attract Brussels?..

If we agree on the leading role of the “outstanding individuals” in sculpturing history, and take a close-up on European Union protagonists influencing Brexit negotiations, we’ll see that they function in totally different modus operandi than the looking forward British PM. The European Commission president (the ‘Prime Minister of Europe’) Jean-Claude Juncker is concerned with keeping the EU project intact in its original form, repeatedly referring to the forefathers – Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet who resurrected Europe from the ashes of the WWII on entirely new basis. Devoting his life to the ideas of the United States of Europe, Juncker’s major preoccupation is the risk of Brexit provoking a collapse of the entire 70 years old architecture, erected gradually after the European Coal and Steel Community united in 1950 in order to secure lasting peace.

Ideologically Juncker faces similar problems in dealing with Brexit as the Pope, who faced unpleasant news from a rebellious English King, rejecting to acknowledge his authority, and thus pay tribute to the Holy See. Juncker’s preoccupation is not to let the heresy to spread, subsequently the creation of a new ‘dynamic and vibrant’ engagement with London would be detrimental to the original project, showing to the other member-states, that life outside the EU can be so much better than inside.

In this case May’ appeal to embrace together the wonders of Digital Revolution falls on deaf ears: Juncker, as usual, is looking backward, contemplating ashes of the WWII. Keeping in mind the origins of the European project, the protection of its ‘sacred’ four freedoms from British ‘heresy’ becomes paramount. Allowing the new engagement to be a success means to give in to those, who ‘betrayed’ the great idea of Schuman, and  ‘tricked’ Britons into the trap of leave vote – an unthinkable compromise for such a ‘guardian’ of the EU Treaties as Jean-Claude Juncker.

In this context one can not exclude the ‘no-deal’ scenario, when the UK faces Brexting on WTO rules. Anyway, when dealing with dogmatics, it would be useful to keep an ace up the sleeve:)

 

The Cheat La Tour

II Brexit referendum as gambling addicion

Anna van Densky, OPINION

A hint of a possibility of II Brexit referendum made by one of the most prominent Leave EU campaigners, the Member of the European Parliament, Nigel Farage made headlines worldwide, however the possibility  of the second plebiscite is just hypothetical.

Any genuine public vote has element of risk, and Prime minister Theresa May knows it from her own experience of nearly lost snap elections, reportedly ill-advised by European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker. She was aiming at confirming her authority in leading nation through Brexit, her stated reason was to strengthen her hand in Brexit negotiations, but she achieved a poor result of losing majority, facing perspective of ‘hung’ parliament.

After the snap elections unexpected failure May would hardly try her luck the second time calling for referendum on Brexit, gambling her political future. In case LeaveEU wins the second referendum, May as a figure of a compromise, and a former ‘Remainer’ won’t be able to keep a grip on power, and the Brexit hardliners would sweep away May’ government – a blend of ‘moderate’ Brexiteers (read ‘converted Remainers’) like Prime Minister herself, and genuine Brexiteers receiving ministerial portfolios in exchange of toning down.

The II Brexit referendum is not only a ‘Russian roulette’ for Theresa May, and her government, but even more so for the EU. If one recalls the experience of the II Irish referendum, as a model of  a clever managing an exercise of ‘direct democracy’, one forgets that in Irish case there was no alternative. The Republic of Ireland was the only member state to hold a referendum on Lisbon Treaty, and without second referendum the situation could not move on for the entire EU block, unlike the case of Brexit led by PM May, who has already accepted lion’s share of Brussels claims.

The gambling risks are not affordable for the EU in decline, struggling against rapidly rising Eurosceptic parties. The moral damages can be dramatic, however the financial could be devastating . Till now for PM May offered the EU a generous ‘allowance’, and transition period with unclear end date. In case of the II ‘yes’ to Brexit vote, the ‘hardliners’ will not leave a penny to Brussels bureaucrats, neither will they take the “poisonous pill’ of Brexit deal.  In short, the addiction to gambling may invite catastrophe for both the EU as a fragilized block and the UK incumbent Government. Above it all, Theresa May as a Remainer heading Brexit is too precious interlocutor for the EU to risk to lose.

Ne quid nimis 🙂

 

Florence speech as Renaissance Fata Morgana

Anna van Densky, OPINION

Public speeches of politicians are not confessions,
even less can they be compared to an experience on
a couch of a psychoanalyst, and Britons can only hope
that the Florence speech of PM Theresa May
was a public relations moment, and not a roadmap
for #Brexit.
Even at first glance once can notice that the aims
of president of the EU executive body – European Commission –
Jean-Claude Juncker are opposite to May’s wish to achieve ‘Renaissance’
in a framework of a renewed partnership between
the UK and the reduced to 27 members bloc.

In his September state of the Union speech Juncker clearly
formulated the goals: a full-forward to the United States of Europe,
with mentioning Brexit in a sinister wow the UK would “regret” the
decision to leave the bloc soon. The intention to enshrine Brexit
as a negative example forever has been the only concept circulating
in Brussels corridors of power, where the EU diplomats
in ‘confidential’ talks would hint on only possible future
of London, and it was not a splendor of Florence,

but as declining Venice (or fall of Venice)Venice decline the inevitable poor fate of the rebellious  against Brussels bureaucracy Britons.

May’s calls for Renaissance are also utopia because of the United Kingdom
post-Brexit prosperity will set a precedent and give an example to many others, namely the old members of the EU to leave the block, reestablishing sovereignty – the ‘heresy’ leading to collapse of the United States of Europe project.

Certainly, the proposal to pay fee beyond Brexit May made is attractive
to the EU federal state architects, however it does not exclude
their profound concern with the post-Brexit success of the Leavers.
The best scenario for the EU would be to continue to accept the UK fee,
and diminish its political influence, meanwhile imposing ‘four freedoms’ dogma.
So Britons would obey Brussels, pay for the construction of the EU superstate, preserving de facto four freedoms, including the reception of migrants,
but without a political presentation in the EU intuitions.

A “wonderful woman” as president Trump rightfully characterised May for her many virtues,  has been already once lured into a trap by president Juncker, reportedly
convincing her to declare the snap elections she lost.
Calls for Renaissance in relentless search for compromise to satisfy the EU quenching thirst for power and finance, will certainly please Brussels,
happy to find in May a Remainer leading Brexit.
But do Britons need a head of government, bowing to Brussels in Brexit talks?

Henry VIII

Imagine Henry VIII proposing to Pope:
‘Look, we don’t believe you are an apostolic successor to Saint Peter, you holding the keys to Haven, etc, – so I will become the head of Church in my country, but
we continue to pay you for two more years according to previous obligations,
and then we create a new equal-footed
partnership for mutual benefit and prosperity.
Please, let’s go for Renaissance together!”

Would the pontiff accept it?
Ha-ha:)

Pope FB

Brexit negotiations pessimistic forecast

Anna van Densky, OPINION

The repeated requests for ‘clarifications’ from behalf of the EU27 articulated by the chief negotiator Michel Barnier reflect the state of the disbelief of the block vis-à-vis Britons who voted for abandoning of Europe’s project. In a long list of issues to be settled to the UK membership expiration date, the rights of the EU citizens, and the payments of fees beyond departure date are among the most controversial.

The demands of Barnier to create a three million strong growing expat community in UK, subdued to the EU law under umbrella of the European court of Justice, attributing it supremacy in jurisdiction over these citizens, and offering the European Commission right to monitor the situation, is de facto a claim of creating a EU27 enclave in the UK.

Nowadays the two groups of expats are different not only in numbers, as the Europeans are roughly three times more numerous in the UK, but also have different demographic potential. If the UK group has a large segment of senior citizens, which will be reduced with time for natural reasons, the Europeans represent the young generation with growing families, eager to pass their status to children. The demographic potential of 3,3 million of Europeans including more than a half a million of children in need of schooling  is in stark  contrast with the decreasing group of British wealthy senior citizens purchasing properties, and healthcare on continent.  As the recent study shows the biggest UK citizens community resides in Spain – more than 300 thousand people, and one-third of them are over 65, presumably retired.

However it is not economic, but political potential of EU growing group that should be of concern for Britons, risking to face a sizable problem in hosting a young and fast growing community, which can be a subject to a different kind of manipulations in the hands of the Brussels bureaucracy. In reality Barnier promotes the European community in the UK as a Trojan horse, serving the EU interests in the UK, and not the interests of the community itself, which naturally should be aiming at integration, and not prioritising the ties with the continent they have abandoned.

The other contradictory claim derives from the EU27 ‘divorce’ concept of Brexit, which is also at odds with the enshrined in Lisbon Treaty right of a state to cancel its membership. With the  ‘divorce’ concept Brussels is attempting to plant in public conscience the idea of ‘allowance’,  ethically framing the move of taking Prime minister Theresa May to cleaners.

If brushing away the profane description of the process, imposed by the European Commission, the membership cancellation does not include any membership fee beyond the actual legal period of being in the ranks of the European Union project. However the EU27 with a remarkable tenacity attempts to force the UK to pay the fees until the end of the financial term to ensure the stability for the European programmes until the finale of the current institutional mandate for the EU top executives, prioritising their personal political ambitions over long standing strategic interests of the continental Europeans, and Britons.

The exaggerated claims of the EU27 are rooted in the denial  of the reality of Brexit, namely the rejection of the UK citizens to continue their engagement with the European project, shifting from Single Market to European superstate. The obsessive pursuit of Brussels financial interests, and claims of an exclusive status to EU expats, will force the UK to leave without a deal, and this episode will leave a profound scar in relations between former partners for generations to come.

Brexit talks in Brussels

Britain’s Brexit minister David Davis vowed to “get down to work” ahead of a first full round of negotiations, however the gap between the EU27 financial claims, and the UK readiness to contribute to Europe’s purse after departure remains huge, so is the order of talks, imposed by the bloc, insisting on settling the ‘divorce’ bill first, and arranging a new framework of relations after.

The EU27 financial claims widely considered as an Apple of Discord between Brussels and the UK government, accepting to contribute beyond Brexit in some programmes, but not in a lavish ways the EU apparatchiks desire. The departure of the second net contributor leaves a huge hole in the EU27 budget, without an immediate solution how to mend it, putting many EU projects at risk.

The incumbent EU executives are also looking for the ways to conclude their mandate without having egg on their faces for shrinking activities in European project. Many experts consider that the Enlargement to the East without respect of Copenhagen criteria, and open door migration policy undermined the EU, forcing Britons to leave. There are many forecasts the UK will not be the only country eager to end its membership in the advanced democracies club, increasingly shifting away from its original concept of stability and prosperity in Europe.

Failed Mogherini’s bit of trolling May

It looks the EU top diplomat Federcia Mohgerini’s attempt to troll the UK Prime Minister May failed – there will be no ‘hung’ Parliament in the UK, and #Brexit talks will start in 10 days as foreseen due to the alliance between the Conservatives and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), joining with 10 MPs. Apparently the heavy-weight in politics May is not an easy target even for mega-trolls:)

However it would be better for the EU executives to restrain from the trolling PM May in the future, because on contrary to Brussels, leaving without the Article 50 deal has a lot of political benefits for the Conservatives, delivering  the desirable STOP of paying Brussels all at once. The departure of the  UK being a second net contributor with full membership fee of £17.8 billion (the deduction of the Thacher’s rebate reduces it to £12.9 billion),  or £35 million a day, – this departure leaves the EU without an answer how to mend the giant hole in the pocket.

The chances of Conservatives oping for #hardBrexit in alliance with DUP loom large, envisaging the scenario of the UK leaving Brussels ‘elite’ insolvent, and immobilized to move forward their ultimate target of ‘more Europe.’

Tusk: ‘good will’ for Brexit

“…We confirmed our strong commitment to the transatlantic relationship, and to further strengthening security cooperation, including between NATO and the EU” – said President Donald Tusk after his meeting with Prime Minister of Norway Erna Solberg.

“… Let me make a general remark about Brexit. These negotiations are difficult enough as they are. If we start arguing before they even begin, they will become impossible. The stakes are too high to let our emotions get out of hand. Because at stake are the daily lives and interests of millions of people on both sides of the Channel. We must keep in mind that in order to succeed, today we need discretion, moderation, mutual respect and a maximum of good will.” – said President Donald Tusk after his meeting with Prime Minister of Norway Erna Solberg.