NightlyPoe said:
And? And such a deal needs to have a backstop or other such mechanism to be accepted by the EU. You don't understand that the backstop (or any replacement of it) must be part of the deal and that one must be accepted by the UK parliament before April 12, or there will be no deal. I completely understand that's what the EU wants. The UK is correctly refusing to relinquish its sovereignty. So the EU can't have it. And if the Irish border is truly that important to them, then it's the EU that needs to be flexible on the subject, not the UK. Otherwise, the hard border happens in 3 weeks. The UK had almost 3 years but all they did was saying what they didn't want. Now it's high time to tell what they want. That's silly rhetoric and ignores that I advised that they do exactly that and send back an amended deal. I've little doubt that it would pass without that poison pill. Also, how do you get to "2, likely 4 years"? May's deal includes an option for a two year extension. In short, the UK had any opportunity to figure that out, but they rather squandered their time. Time's up Again, that's silly rhetoric. There is still plenty of time to negotiate within the transition period. The backstop is, theoretically, not even supposed to be used. You're acting like the whole thing has to be decided now, when the whole point of the backstop was that it would be decided later and the EU wanted an insurance policy. They don't want a wall, but refuse everything that would avoid a wall. The result will be a wall at this rate if they can't decide on something within the next 3 weeks. What everything? There's only one thing on the table. The ball is on the Uk side for some time now, it's time to play. And, as I said, they should say what they will accept and put the onus on the EU. They thought they were holding all the cards, but found out just how wrong they were. It's not the UK, but the EU who holds the cards Yeah, that sort of attitude is exactly why Brexit is the correct move. What a world we live in where people don't recognize how corrosive that is. |
I'm still not seeing how anything you suggested would put the ball back in the EU's court.
They would simply refuse until the UK came up with a suitable insurance policy or a genuine solution to the border issue that didn't break the GFA and international law (which is basically what the EU have been saying all along). The onus would be back on the UK as the party that decided to leave, and international law would be on the EU's side. What realistic alternative amendment to the backstop do you suggest the UK sends?
@ your last point (italics)
It's not just the EU that holds all the cards. This is supposed to be the easy part with our nearest neighbors. How do you think we're going to get deals with other large nations when we've squandered trade with our nearest and largest allies?
