We use cookies to help improve and maintain our site. More information.
close

September 28, 2018

How to make sense of Boris Johnson‘s challenge to Theresa May

The Brexit battle is coming to a head as Boris Johnson has made his de facto claim for the Tory leadership - in an article for the Daily Telegraph. We are so glad to find that newspapers have found a new role in this day and age.

He does not directly announce a leadership bid, but sets out what we consider the only plausible alternative to the Chequers proposal: a complete exit from the customs union and the single market. For those interested in Brexit, his 4000-word opus is worth reading if only to dispel the myth that the eurosceptics have not thought it through. They have. He presents a lot of technical details that goes much beyond the political discourse. The downfall of his essay is dishonesty and lack of judgement in one specific, though crucially important, point. He is wrong to say that the EU would accept a renunciation of the Irish backstop. The Canada-style option he prefers is a no-deal option. Once you have a border in place, however soft it may appear, incentives might shift. But the EU cannot drop the Irish backstop ex ante because it has invested so much political capital on it. 

May will no doubt challenge him on this point. She rejects Canada for that precise reasons. But Johnson makes a number of points that will strike a chord with the Tory party base. One is that Chequers was based on the belief that you can be half-in and half-out. That goes to the heart of the problem. The whole essence of Chequers was to find a solution that would have allowed a degree of technical triangulation, but the EU has concluded that it would give the UK a competitive advantage. We believe that the EU has always had a tendency to overstate the effects of the single market. But what matters is not whether this calculation is right or wrong, but whether it is widely shared - and that seems to be case. By rejecting Chequers, the EU is undermining Theresa May, who will have a tough time defending her Chequers proposal at the conference. The most powerful argument against Chequers now is not that it is intellectually weak (which we admit it is), but that is not feasible once the EU rejects it in its essence. The EU has thus unwittingly given Johnson a boost. The customs union is now the only feasible deal. But politically, it would require a change of government since only the Labour Party supports it.

As we are approaching the Brexit deadline, it is important to lay out the political processes in the UK and the EU with greater clarity. We keep noting a tendency among UK political commentators to console themselves with the observation that there is no parliamentary majority for a no-deal Brexit. But remember that the only mechanism that would have allowed the UK parliament to force the government to change the Brexit negotiations against its will was defeated. The parliament can still express its displeasure at a no-deal Brexit but it has precious few powers to force the government‘s hand. For starters, it is impossible to conduct a referendum before March 2019. So a referendum procedure would require that the EU extend the Art. 50 deadline by unanimity. May said she would never request such an extension. We would not rule out that the UK Supreme Court might empower parliament to give concrete instructions to the government on this point, but the UK parliament cannot force a unanimous decision in the European Council. A recalcitrant May could always enlist the help of a friendly EU partner - Viktor Orbán springs to mind - to veto an extension request if it was forced upon her. The reason why people like Sir Ivan Rogers, the former UK permanent representative to the EU, has been so gloomy about the no-deal scenario is that he understands those mechanisms better than those who focus only on the domestic UK debate.

Following the recent events, the Tory party conference will turn into a contest of two contrasting Brexit alternatives - between‘s Chequers or no deal and Canada or no deal. You don‘t have to be a math genius to determine the precise intersection of those two positions. After the conference, the leadership question may still be open, but we see a great danger that the Tories may be converging towards a no-deal position - a no-deal not so much as a result of a failure to agree, but as an actively sought solution to its multiple Brexit dilemmas. If you read the Telegraph‘s web page, you will find another article further down, by Jeremy Warner, a conservative economics commentator, who is not usually know for extreme views. The headline reads: "there is no point negotiating with the European Union - just ask Yanis Varoufakis.“

What puzzles us is why the EU is ditching Chequers. Maybe they know something we do not. Maybe they are betting on a second referendum. A probable explanation is that they might have miscalculated. They may be misinformed about the rather limited set of conditions under which a second referendum could take place, or how a government can be replaced. We would invite readers to enlighten us on the strategic thinking behind the rejection of Chequers. We are aware, of course, of the concerns that Chequers would give the UK a competitive advantage. But even if that were true, this calculation would need to be contrasted with the alternatives. Would the EU be more comfortable turning the UK into the world‘s largest tax and regulatory haven, which is what Johnson is seeking to do? 

Show Comments Write a Comment

September 28, 2018

Macedonia's historic choice

Macedonia will hold a referendum on its name change this Sunday. The new name, North Macedonia, would end a 27 year long dispute with Greece and allow Macedonia to join the EU and Nato. Yet there is still a lot of resistance to overcome for the referendum to succeed. Strikingly, President Gjorge Ivanov called this week for a boycott of the vote and called the deal a historic suicide. Participation has to be above 50% for the result to be valid, which then has to be approved by the Macedonian parliament with a two-thirds majority before it is passed on to the Greek parliament for ratification. The question of the referendum clearly links the name to the purpose of EU and Nato membership:

"Are you in favour of European Union and Nato membership by accepting the agreement between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Greece?"

Will the vote succeed? Hard to tell: it all seems to boil down to participation. Public opinion polls point to a victory for the yes-camp, but they also suggest that around 40% of voters do not want to vote or might chose to boycott the referendum, according to Kathimerini. There are those who take issue with how the question is phrased. There are misgivings that the deal has been rushed through without wider consultations. Some argue that the name deal is not necessary for Macedonia to join the EU or Nato. There have been fake news spread on twitter accounts to incite people to stay away from the vote. The president's appeal amplified and solidified the boycott-the-vote campaign.

There has been enormous pressure from the international community in recent weeks, with officials’ visits, statements, videotaped messages, letters, and even derogatory comments that verged on the threatening - suggesting the vote is the choice between North Macedonia and North Korea. None of this is really supportive. It is a historic moment for Macedonia, and one must hope it will not be determined by a feeling of coercion which would only breed resentment. 

Show Comments Write a Comment

September 28, 2018

Macron - a world-class leader against populism?

The Guardian takes a look at Emmanuel Macron and wonders whether he really could be the world's new figurehead of liberal democracy against xenophobia and nationalism - as he so obviously aspires to be. With Donald Trump in the White House and Angela Merkel in her 13th year of governance facing an uncertain political situation at home, Macron seems a plausible candidate for the job. His impassioned defence of internationalism at the UN this week shows that time and again he finds the right words to claim the mantle and fill this role. But the problem is that there is a gap between his eloquence and his power to transform words into deeds. Macron's belief in his own reforming capacity may exceed his ability to deliver.

At home he has yet to prove that he can produce economic and social reforms, and that his promise of transforming France is coming true. He defends a pro-European platform with more vigour than any other leader in Europe, yet his autocratic style provokes the populist backlash it aims to neutralise. His displays of elitism and arrogance in public appearances highlight a lack of empathy and an inability to listen to those who feel that they have been let down by the system. And his approach to Brexit, urging EU leaders to unite against a compromise meeting Theresa May half way, seems overzealous and short-sighted. The paper wonders whether Macron really understands the economic and cultural drivers of euroscepticism. The problem is not a lack of ambition and talent, but lack of humility and experience.

Show Comments Write a Comment

This is the public section of the Eurointelligence Professional Briefing, which focuses on the geopolitical aspects of our news coverage. It appears daily at 2pm CET. The full briefing, which appears at 9am CET, is only available to subscribers. Please click here for a free trial, and here for the Eurointelligence home page.

 

Recent News

  • January 05, 2018
  • Catalonia's government by Skype
  • The case for EEA membership
  • February 28, 2017
  • Is Hamon losing the right wing of his party?
  • Something we just don’t understand
  • Solve the problem
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • May 31, 2019
  • Salvini’s frightening strength
  • The significance of Corbyn’s latest flipflop on the referendum
  • August 20, 2018
  • ... and a subtle shift in EU policies towards both Russia and Turkey
  • Nothing to celebrate about the end of the bailout programme
  • Support for Brexit holding up
  • November 09, 2017
  • From street protests to road closures
  • What Russia wants
  • January 31, 2017
  • Project fear against Italexit
  • On how not to frustrate Brexit
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • February 07, 2019
  • Forget Tusk - the real action is elsewhere
  • On David Malpass and the Trump legacy
  • May 28, 2018
  • A no-confidence motion that could backfire
  • The political repercussions of a historic referendum in Ireland
  • Why the lack of an international role for the euro matters
  • September 15, 2017
  • Juncker dragged into the Catalan fray
  • What to say in Florence
  • How to fill the gap left by the British MEPs
  • January 05, 2017
  • French Socialist primaries - old wine in new bottles
  • Le Pen's hard ecu
  • Will Tusk get a second mandate?
  • Themes of 2017
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • April 26, 2019
  • How Brexit has given rise to different perceptions of reality
  • The EP, not Madrid, will boost Spanish clout
  • How realistic is a Gaullist Europe?
  • September 17, 2018
  • About the new partnership between Russia and China
  • EU ponders Irish backstop protocol to help May
  • February 07, 2018
  • A short note on bitcoin
  • July 04, 2017
  • On the CDU’s programme
  • Macron defines his presidential style
  • Why do we criticise modern macro?
  • November 28, 2016
  • And now what Monsieur Fillion?
  • The inescapable logic of an interim agreement
  • On Germany's foreign policy post-Trump
  • How to lose against the populists
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • April 01, 2019
  • Meaningful IV
  • Caputová elected: a turning point for central Europe?
  • October 02, 2018
  • Whatever it takes - diesel version
  • Is Macron's European discourse too simplistic?
  • April 06, 2018
  • Schleswig Holstein collapses Spain's strategy against Catalan separatism
  • On the implausibility of conspiracy theories in the Skripal case
  • October 09, 2017
  • UK is starting to prepare for a no-deal Brexit
  • Why Germany will resist meaningful eurozone reform
  • April 12, 2017
  • Macro in a state of denial
  • Where Schulz is vulnerable
  • Schäuble’s three party tricks
  • October 17, 2016
  • Ceta is dead for now
  • L’après-Hollande, c'est Hollande
  • SPD against Russia sanctions
  • Nissan to join customs union and other fanciful tales
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • June 10, 2019
  • How to create Brexit facts
  • The new Alde is already in trouble
  • January 31, 2019
  • EU will play hardball until February 14, and stick to backstop beyond
  • French left and right moves ahead of EP elections
  • Tighten the belts as the economy prepares for landing
  • September 25, 2018
  • Be careful what you wish for - second referendum edition
  • May 21, 2018
  • Another snap election in the UK? Tories are preparing
  • Merkel and Putin - the beginning of a beautiful friendship?
  • January 15, 2018
  • Is the section on Europe for real?
  • Can Drahos upset Zeman?
  • September 11, 2017
  • Turkey issues travel warning for visitors to Germany
  • How nasty is the AfD?
  • May 08, 2017
  • A message of hope
  • Barnier's not so easily agreed Brexit principles
  • The rebirth of the paranoid conspiracy theory
  • January 05, 2017
  • French Socialist primaries - old wine in new bottles
  • Le Pen's hard ecu
  • Will Tusk get a second mandate?
  • Themes of 2017
  • August 23, 2016
  • Sarkozy launches candidacy in a book
  • Rajoy plans to try again in October
  • Turkey recalls ambassador from Austria
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • August 05, 2019
  • No deal first, elections later
  • Free movement of labour? Not for politicians
  • Europe already lost the digital battle
  • July 11, 2019
  • Focus on election timetable, not prorogation...
  • ...and not on Darroch either
  • June 19, 2019
  • What the US-Iran standoff tells us about the EU
  • Is Germany withholding information on right-wing extremism?
  • May 28, 2019
  • Greens in EP boosted by numbers and national politics
  • May 07, 2019
  • … while Macron’s European troubles have already begun, and might get even worse
  • Don't discount a Brexit deal
  • Is Tsipras too complacent?
  • Costa - the fiscally responsible Socialist
  • April 15, 2019
  • Finland's far right changes the game
  • Brexit party drawing almost even with the Tories
  • March 28, 2019
  • Fidesz exposes EPP to barrage of provocations
  • How Berlin has turned the ghost of Aachen into a poltergeist
  • March 11, 2019
  • Ask what Europe can do for Germany - AKK's EU manifesto
  • February 21, 2019
  • Sound and fury, but Brexit reality unchanged
  • Supertanker Deutschland moves to join internet age
  • February 04, 2019
  • Watch out for the resurgence in Tory unity
  • The gilets-jaunes' effect on the European elections
  • What did he possibly mean by that?
  • January 18, 2019
  • Why Dublin won't yield on the backstop
  • Town hall debates vs street protests - who is winning?
  • January 04, 2019
  • Will the AfD become the Dexit party?
  • Romania's corruption problem in the spotlight of its EU presidency
  • December 12, 2018
  • 48 letters
  • A sense of deja-vu
  • November 30, 2018
  • May’s one and only trump card
  • Are the gilets jaunes as powerful as the 1995 protests?
  • Tsipras is dishing out more goodies
  • November 19, 2018
  • May’s pushback is kicking in
  • November 09, 2018
  • What to make of Merz’ pro-Europeanism
  • November 01, 2018
  • Is candidate Merz a keen pro-European?
  • Around the corner - Brexit edition
  • October 24, 2018
  • Can the eurozone be governed without a parliament?
  • EU to grant UK-wide backstop
  • Merkel flip-flops on diesel legislation
  • October 18, 2018
  • Disorder, disorder....
  • Tsipras sacrifices Kotzias - but what's the end game?
  • October 12, 2018
  • A deal so close, and yet so far
  • AfD leaves Germans speachless and helpless
  • October 08, 2018
  • A renewed willingness on both sides to cut a Brexit deal
  • Latvian politics in turmoil after huge populist gains
  • October 05, 2018
  • What to make of the Anglo-Irish approximation on the backstop?
  • Macron's launches charm offensive but gives offence nevertheless
  • Moscovici all but breaks with his socialist party
  • October 02, 2018
  • Whatever it takes - diesel version
  • Is Macron's European discourse too simplistic?
  • October 01, 2018
  • After the referendum, more turmoil in Macedonia
  • What will happen if the UK parliament votes No?
  • Barnier's no-thanks works much better than a yes-please