Why is Brexit taking so long?
1. Appalled by the prospect of losing its second largest contributor, the EU bureaucracy is being as obstructive as possible. The objective is to extract from the UK as much money as possible for as long as possible whilst simultaneously persuading UK citizens that you cannot rush complicated negotiations and no daylight robbery is involved.
2. When a political revolution has been effected democratically, the necessary counter-revolution takes some time. The ruling establishment cannot just reverse the popular decision overnight; even the famously phlegmatic British might take umbrage at that. Therefore the establishment agree with Brussels that the process is fiendishly complicated and they try to achieve by delay what they could not achieve by persuasion. Their objective is to wear down the popular will simply by monotonous repetition of the same difficulties.
As evidence of this, notice the change that has come over the two negotiating principles enunciated by the PM. These began as:
a) Brexit means Brexit.
b) No deal is better than a bad deal.
So far as one can judge the present wording is:
c) Brexit means Remain in limbo indefinitely.
d) Any deal, even a rotten one, is better than no deal.
Anyone who has ever negotiated anything knows you must preserve the option of walking away. If your opponent knows you cannot or will not do that then you will either lose or the negotiations will go on for ever.
Either of which, by coincidence, suits Brussels (see point 1 above). The very idea of allowing them to decide when the UK has arrived at a satisfactory solution to the EU’s currently-contrived obstacles-in-chief would be derisory if it were not actually happening.
And by coincidence indefinite postponement is also what our establishment want (see point 2 above).
Therefore the answer to the question is, if you think you’re seeing delaying tactics you ain’t seen nothing yet.
2. When a political revolution has been effected democratically, the necessary counter-revolution takes some time. The ruling establishment cannot just reverse the popular decision overnight; even the famously phlegmatic British might take umbrage at that. Therefore the establishment agree with Brussels that the process is fiendishly complicated and they try to achieve by delay what they could not achieve by persuasion. Their objective is to wear down the popular will simply by monotonous repetition of the same difficulties.
As evidence of this, notice the change that has come over the two negotiating principles enunciated by the PM. These began as:
a) Brexit means Brexit.
b) No deal is better than a bad deal.
So far as one can judge the present wording is:
c) Brexit means Remain in limbo indefinitely.
d) Any deal, even a rotten one, is better than no deal.
Anyone who has ever negotiated anything knows you must preserve the option of walking away. If your opponent knows you cannot or will not do that then you will either lose or the negotiations will go on for ever.
Either of which, by coincidence, suits Brussels (see point 1 above). The very idea of allowing them to decide when the UK has arrived at a satisfactory solution to the EU’s currently-contrived obstacles-in-chief would be derisory if it were not actually happening.
And by coincidence indefinite postponement is also what our establishment want (see point 2 above).
Therefore the answer to the question is, if you think you’re seeing delaying tactics you ain’t seen nothing yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Would you like to comment on this post?