Johnson's "class breach of contract" touched two sensitive nerves in the international community
It has been less than a year since it was difficult to reach a Brexit agreement. Because of the Northern Ireland border issue, the Anglo-European negotiations were once again on the verge of breaking down during the countdown to the deadline.
"Atypical politician" Johnson wrote on Twitter on September 12: "Let the EU take their threats off the negotiating table." Two days before, the eighth round of future relations negotiations between Britain and Europe ended in London, despite the negotiations. It has not been completely broken, but the EU said that mutual trust between the two parties "has been severely impaired" and is "stepping up preparations to draw a chaotic end to Britain's departure from the EU."
The rising contradiction stems from Johnson's recent proposal to "rewrite" the Brexit agreement.
The "Internal Market Act" announced by the British government on September 9 overturned some of the commitments made to the EU in January this year, requiring the UK to cancel or modify export declarations and other exports after leaving the EU single market and customs union. The rights of goods-related procedures, as well as the continued unrestricted entry and exit of goods from Northern Ireland in the domestic market of the United Kingdom, including England, Wales and Scotland, thereby consolidating the trade policy powers of the four domestic places.
The "Internal Market Act" triggered strong opposition from the European Union and Ireland.
The British Broadcasting Corporation reported that the parts of the new bill related to goods export declarations and government assistance are clearly contrary to the "Northern Ireland Protocol" announced by the Johnson government on May 20 to implement the Brexit agreement.
According to the "Protocol", Northern Ireland will leave the EU Customs Union with the rest of the United Kingdom, but Northern Ireland still needs to continue to abide by the EU's rules on agriculture and other products.
This means that regardless of whether the UK and the EU can reach a new trade agreement by the end of the year, Northern Ireland will remain in the EU single market, thus avoiding a 500-kilometer border between Northern Ireland in the UK and the Republic of Ireland in the EU. It has become a land "hard border" between the "EU and non-EU regions."
However, once the "Internal Market Act" comes into effect, the British courts will give priority to following the new law rather than the Brexit agreement.
The Johnson administration’s move violated legally binding international agreements and is believed to greatly damage Britain’s reputation and global status.
The British "Guardian" quoted a number of legal professionals as implying that the Johnson administration did not seek relevant opinions from the legal profession in the process of introducing the "Internal Market Act".
"Sovereignty and territorial integrity" is Johnson's greatest weight.
In the parliamentary debate on the day the bill was announced, he has always emphasized that the "Internal Market Bill" will provide "legal certainty" for free trade between England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and "is the basic economic and political integrity of the United Kingdom." Guarantee".
Precisely because of the "political correctness" of this position to a certain extent, after a heated debate in the House of Commons on September 14th, the bill passed the second reading with 340 votes to 263 votes.
Johnson's use of this action to stimulate the nerves of the EU was not entirely a temporary motive.
The new crown pneumonia epidemic, which has not yet been fully controlled, and the economic and employment crisis caused by it, are continuing to swallow the precarious reputation of the Conservative Party as the ruling party.
After recovering from the new crown virus, Johnson himself suffered a double attack from the Labour Party and the Scottish National Party, which has a strong desire for independence.
The United Kingdom, which has always hoped to find a compromise solution under pressure from all parties, has not been able to win the voice that it expects in the "post-Brexit" period, not only in a level playing field, fishing access in British waters, the border of Northern Ireland, No progress has been seen on the core issues of the four major negotiations with the EU on the framework of the future agreement rules. Under the broader international background such as Sino-US frictions, the initiative of strategic autonomy is increasingly lost.
Combining the above factors, Johnson vigorously advocated the concept of "recovering sovereignty" at this time, which not only meant to save the ruling foundation, but also to divert the attention of the domestic people.
In addition, the UK announced on September 11 that it had reached in principle the "UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement" with Japan. To a certain extent, the UK hopes that this move will become the driving force for subsequent trade negotiations.
It is understood that in addition to Japan and the European Union, the United Kingdom is currently in simultaneous trade negotiations with the United States, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries.
The conclusion of the principles of the Anglo-Japanese Free Trade Agreement has also locked the UK's admission ticket to the "Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement" (CPTPP), giving Johnson more confidence in making other decisions.
Analysis generally believes that the "internal market bill" that overrides the Brexit agreement wants to smoothly pass through the House of Lords of the British Parliament, and then it is finally passed, and there is great resistance.
In the UK, many members of the House of Lords, including former Conservative Party leader Michael Howard, have clearly expressed their opposition, and five former prime ministers have publicly questioned the content of the bill.
Two former prime ministers from the Conservative Party and the Labour Party, Major and Blair, jointly wrote an article in the Sunday Times published on September 13, stating that Johnson’s government actions were “irresponsible and wrong in principle. It is also dangerous in practice."
Cameron, another former prime minister, said that the current "bigger prospects" for the British government should be to work hard to reach a trade agreement with the EU and try to maintain the integrity of the Brexit agreement.
The opposition outside the UK is even stronger.
The EU warned that if Johnson does not abandon relevant claims before the end of September, the EU will take legal action.
Observers believe that, taking into account the current world situation, Johnson's move similar to "breaking the contract" touched at least two sensitive nerves in the international community: one is that the British move is seen as arbitrarily undermining international rules; the other is to resolve differences. Efforts should be made to maintain the atmosphere of negotiation instead of forcibly "decoupling."
What's more, even if Brexit is a foregone conclusion, all parties generally agree that Britain and Europe are inextricably linked, and Britain itself cannot deny that it will always be a part of Europe.
Therefore, even the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Pelosi, recently warned that if the Johnson administration deliberately violated the Brexit agreement, the U.S. Congress will not approve the slow-moving Anglo-U.S. trade agreement, because the U.K. will fall into greater uncertainty in the future. Among.
Gideon Lackman, the chief foreign affairs commentator of the British "Financial Times" recently criticized, "The political atmosphere in London is hysterical and isolated from the world."
If Britain and Europe cannot reach a future relationship agreement including a trade agreement before the end of the Brexit transition period on December 31 this year, the two sides will return to the WTO framework and re-implement border inspections and tariffs. Trade costs will increase significantly.
Taking into account the need to set aside time for the UK and EU parliaments to conduct a fixed process, Johnson emphasized that if an agreement cannot be reached before October 15, the UK will accept a "no-deal Brexit", which is a "good result" for the UK.
The New York Times commented that Johnson’s current position is as unfounded as he himself was when he strongly advocated a “no-deal Brexit” at the end of last year.
Analysts generally believe that the direction of the incident depends more on the UK.
Faced with the EU’s tough stance on several core issues, and the desire to further coordinate with the UK on standards and regulations, Johnson wants to truly achieve the stop loss goal and needs to make a bigger deal than before the "Internal Market Act" was proposed. compromise.
However, the BBC political editor Laura Kunsberg bluntly stated that the possibility of the Johnson government's concession is slim, and the room for the two parties to reach a deal is gradually diminishing.
But this does not mean that the breakdown of the Anglo-Europe trade agreement negotiations is a foregone conclusion.
Johnson would not fail to notice that within a week after the "Internal Market Act" was introduced, the pound had depreciated to below parity with the euro.
Another British media reported that Johnson explained during the phone call with French President Macron that the changes were "limited" and technical. This was interpreted as Johnson's technical pressure on the EU at the last minute.
At present, Britain's chief negotiator Frost and EU chief negotiator Barnier have confirmed that a new round of meetings and negotiations between the two sides will continue next week.
"The outside world is looking forward to their willingness to take a step back." The New York Times commented, otherwise they can only watch the situation go towards the "Big Bang", and that would be something neither side would want to see.
Our newspaper, Beijing, September 16th
China Youth Daily·China Youth Daily reporter Ma Ziqian Source: China Youth Daily