COULD Varadker play a blinder?

[Miljah]

First, I have no personal skin in the game. Apart from the bomb scares of the 70s in British towns. And the nightly news.

Secondly, I have tried to keep abreast of the political landscape in NI, while understanding that there are complexities way beyond my ken at play.

And thirdly, a MN suspension, maybe six months ago, as an outsider musing whether it was deeply patronising to the people of NI to assume, as a matter of course, that the only way to broker differences was bombs and guns, there surely had to be other ways?- I was told in no uncertain terms that these were the only tools available, and that I should butt out as a non NI person....

SO. What if Varadker, highly unlikely, I know, were to offer reunification with an undertaking to respect Protestant rights? I recognise the economics, here- 70% of NI jobs are financed UK public sector. Could the republic pick up that slack? Would NI people earning that public sector cash want to jeopardise that?

But might that represent the first inkling of a way forward for NI? EU membership (and I'd bet ££ (I don't have 'euro, euro' on my keyboard! 😊) in order to sweeten that seismic shift; especially now NI must recognise that much of GB didn't even know, or care, about the GFA?

How soon before I am reported, in outrage?....

Apart from the bomb scares of the 70s in British towns

I think you’ll mean bomb threats in English towns. That’s what pricked ears. Lots of bombings in British towns in NI but the English didn’t really care about that too much.

Varadkar has no mandate to look for reunification. There’s isn’t support in Ireland. There are very few economies in the world who could support a drain in terms of the ratios we’re talking about with NI.

Poor NI has really been thrown aside by Westminster.

Seems to be a big difference of opinion on this thread on the subject of reunification of NI and ROI. As UK mainland person I always thought that was the wish of both NI and ROI, but appears not to be the case.

As for Borders take a look at:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7491855/Jean-Claude-Juncker-says-convinced-Brexit-happen.html

DM not the most reliable source, but seems to bring out what has been posted on other threads.

EU want to protect its Single Market when UK leaves EU. Only way to achieve that is with border checks. ROI, as an EU member, must install border checks in accordance with EU law.

UK does not have to follow EU laws once they have left the EU, particularly if no deal is agreed. WTO is vague on borders. Possible that two borders may appear?

Varadkar is PM (Taoiseach) of ROI and not PM of NI. So his task is to look out for ROI.

Varadkar is Taoiseach of Ireland and as such has a responsibility to defend the GFA. He also has a responsibility to the large number of Irish citizens living in NI.

Varadkar is Taoiseach of Ireland and as such has a responsibility to defend the GFA. He also has a responsibility to the large number of Irish citizens living in NI

Does that mean all governments are responsible for their citizens when they are overseas either through; holiday, working, emigrated, etc.,?

Potentially difficult one for Varadkar. EU law makes no reference to the GFA at all. However, as an EU member Ireland has to comply with EU laws on border controls between EU and non EU Countries.

If Varadkar chooses to sacrifice EU law for the GFA, Ireland could face massive penalties for non compliance. Worst case scenario is disease enters EU from Ireland due to poor border control on organic products (food, live animals).

Once it became known to the World there was an uncontrolled entry into EU, then NI becomes the World's smuggling capital as suppliers will flood NI with goods that are currently banned by EU

Likewise if Varadkar chooses EU law over the GFA, Ireland takes the blame for any troubles arising from borders.

The Irish government has always been clear they will uphold EU law and that means enforcing border controls if the UK breaches the GFA and changes the condition under which a border is not needed.

They will be there still trying to protect the GFA and all the people of Ireland after Brexit.

if the UK breaches the GFA and changes the condition under which a border is not needed

Article 50 was signed by all EU members in 2009. There is nothing in Article 50 that references GFA. Nor is GFA part of UK constitution as demonstrated in law.

If UK leaves no deal and trades under WTO there is no need for a hard border to be installed by UK between NI and ROI. WTO have confirmed this. However, if ROI installs a border in accordance with EU law that is their decision. Totally out of UK's control what EU members do (or don't do) when UK leaves the EU.

Again, tortuous attempts at deliberate misunderstanding by Mystery.
GFA is an international agreement to which the UK is signatory. No Deal breaks it. Orderly Brexit doesn't. The UK is responsible for breaking GFA if we No Deal. Increasingly desperate attempts to pretend it isn't.

WTO has said you don't need a hard border but you need something.

WTO has said you don't need a hard border

Correct

but you need something

Fine. UK does something (whatever that is meant to be) and Ireland install a border like those in Eastern Europe in accordance with EU law.

GFA is an international agreement to which the UK is signatory

Also signed by Ireland too. So why is it if Ireland installs an Eastern European style border and UK does not, it is UK error?

GFA actually makes no reference to borders at all.

My view is that in a no deal the GFA becomes inoperable and becomes void under the Vienna convention. Logic is that after UK leaves EU, it becomes impossible for NI to comply with EU policies (which are referenced in the GFA) as NI is no longer in the EU

The UK is responsible for breaking GFA if we No Deal

So why was no deal allowed under Article 50 signed by all EU members in 2009? The answer is simple. To prevent the EU saying;

you can only leave with a deal the other EU members approve of

That would be mean the EU becomes a bloc from which there is no possible escape.

Punch line is that GFA makes reference to EU policies, but neither EU law nor Article 50 make reference to GFA. Hence the impossibility condition for treaties becoming void kicks in and there is no GFA.

You keep telling yourself that twisty nonsense, if it makes you feel better.

Also signed by Ireland too. So why is it if Ireland installs an Eastern European style border and UK does not, it is UK error?

Because it would be clear domestically and it's internationally that Ireland has been forced into this position by a decision taken by the British government. Remember Ireland had no say in this vote for Brexit yet we stand to suffer great harm as a result of trying to maintain peace and uphold the GFA.

Because it would be clear domestically and it's internationally that Ireland has been forced into this position by a decision taken by the British government

Incorrect logic. Article 50 signed all EU members in 2009 anticipates the possibility that no deal may occur. Nothing in Article 50 that references the GFA. Nor is there anything in Article 50 that states a member can only leave if the other members agree and will not be disadvantaged in any way to any of the remaining members.

Remember Ireland had no say in this vote for Brexit

All EU members had a say when they signed Article 50 in 2009. Neither Ireland nor UK chirped up and asked the question:

"what happens to GFA/Borders if either ROI or UK invoke Article 50?"

we stand to suffer great harm as a result of trying to maintain peace and uphold the GFA

So tell the EU to shove their border laws?

Wonder how much it would cost to install an Eastern European style border along the entire length of around 500 KM?

I love the idea that any resulting problems wouldn't be the UK's fault and everyone would blame Ireland and make fantastic trade deals with the UK despite the fact it had just trashed GFA . Talk about magic thinking 😂😂😂😂

The absence of international borders is not the normal state of the world. It takes international agreement.
The UK has chosen to remove itself from an organization in away that breaks onr of its other international agreement. It could and can still can Brexit in a way that does not break the GFA.

It does not need to be spelt out in an international agreements that a party exercising it’s rights under that agreement must do so without breaking their other international agreements. That is a legal presumption.

I love the idea that any resulting problems wouldn't be the UK's

UK have contributed to the issue as well as they are part of the British Irish Council.

and make fantastic trade deals with the UK despite the fact it had just trashed GFA

Takes two to negotiate. A no deal is a failure by both parties who took part.

Some might think GFA is the centre of the Universe. Impossible to prove, but I would bet that the number of people on the planet who have never heard of the GFA vastly exceeds those that have heard.

Do you genuinely think that developing markets in both East and Far East are bothered about the island of Ireland? Certainly not the feeling I get on my travels.

You can obviously speak for the entire Far East😂😂😂
The idea that countries wouldn't bring up our destruction of an international agreement as evidence of our untrustworthyness in deal making because they love us ... just hilarious.

The EU is a much bigger market for the UK at the moment and you do know who they have to negotiate that deal with.

The UK has chosen to remove itself from an organization

All members of EU are entitled to leave EU.

in away that breaks onr of its other international agreement

Take two to make an agreement. An unsuccessful negotiation is attributable to both parties.

It could and can still can Brexit in a way that does not break the GFA

So why has UK not left the EU?

It does not need to be spelt out in an international agreements that a party exercising it’s rights under that agreement must do so without breaking their other international agreements. That is a legal presumption

Obviously not a scholar of the Vienna convention.

GFA requires both North and South to take into account EU policies. In a no deal all EU laws and treaties that UK had to observe as a member lapse instantly.

So you then have a document (GFA) that becomes inoperable as it states that North must take into account policies of an organization of which it is no longer a member.

Simple example. Someone changes employer. Are they bound by the terms and conditions of the the previous employer? No they are not. Is the new employer obligated to follow the rules of the previous employer? No they are not.

That's right Mystery, you really have a handle on all of this 😂

as evidence of our untrustworthyness in deal making because they love us ... just hilarious

Who made that statement? Deal, trades and business are conducted on the basis of who can get what in return for what they can offer in return.

History does not enter the discussion. Examples include:

US nuked Japan in WWII, but they are big trading partners.

Germany tried to take control of Europe and the World and exterminated 6 million people in death camps. They too were flattened. Now they trade Worldwide.

Nick Leeson toppled Barings bank and went to prison. How he is in big demand for after dinner talks on credit control.

Point is World moves on and the countries that are prepared to forget about the past have done well

Death camps and nuclear weapons. That's your idea of Brexit and you are a Leaver 😂😂😂😂.

Mystery you are totally missing the point. If the GFA is redundant, then what for peace in NI? Sounds like you don’t particularly care as long as you get your magic trade deals with the rest of the world.

You also have clearly no clue how the NI economy works, all Island business is desperately important and we are already feeling the effects of Brexit uncertainty deeper than anywhere else in the UK.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-49300730

Death camps and nuclear weapons. That's your idea of Brexit and you are a Leaver

Who said that is what Brexit would look like? Point was some countries have buried the hatchet and moved on in a short time and prospered.

I am so sick of male egos and their posturing over this. I've said this until I am blue in the face but Northern Ireland is a special case already. If you live there, in nearly all cases, you are entitled to both British, Irish either, or both, citizenships. If you are an Irish citizen you are an EU citizen after Brexit, living in a non-EU territory. Therefore you have to be accorded a special status within /vis-a-vis the EU because of that anomaly.

Why are our politicians (and the DUP) so incapable to grasping this?

So either NI is a special economic zone, it remains in the CU and SM, or the whole of the UK stays in the CU and SM and pronlem is solved, while the UK leaves the political institutions of the EU. Labour could actually come up with this as a position. Don't need to remain, don't need another referendum, just say "we will leave but remain in the SM and CU to resolve the NI problem and to keep close ties with Europe and limit any problems with the economy".

Of course it's a fudge as we'd then be rule-takers not rule-makers, but you can't have your cake and eat it, however much you try.

@Yadid don't get your knickers in a twist there's many many people in NI that do not want to be part of ROI they'd love to 'get over it' and get on with their lives