The Purpose of The Backstop

Brexiters in recent days have thought that they had a clever argument to put, as they send May back haplessly to renegotiate with the EU over the Irish backstop.  In fact, it simply shows that they do not understand the basic issues involved, and have not been listening.

The argument goes like this.  The EU introduced the requirement of the backstop into the Withdrawal Agreement, because the EU seeks to maintain the commitment set out in the Good Friday Agreement to there being no hard border in Ireland.  If the EU does not remove the backstop, the Brexiters argue, then, as the vote in parliament on Tuesday showed, the Withdrawal Agreement will not pass, and so there will be a No Deal Brexit.  In the case of a No Deal Brexit, the Brexiters argue, then Britain, including Northern Ireland, will simply leave the EU, and so there will be no arrangements for trade, which will mean there will have to be a border in Ireland.  The Brextremists, including the DUP say that Britain would not erect such a border, so it would then be down to the EU to erect that border, meaning that they would have to do what they say they do not want to do, and is the reason for them insisting on the backstop.  On this basis, the Brexiters, and the Brextremists, in particular, think they have put the EU into a logical Catch 22 situation.  They haven't.

Firstly, it's not true that Britain would not be led to introduce a border on its side, because with EU citizens having a right of free movement into Ireland, and a right under the Common Travel Area, to move without checks from the republic to Northern Ireland, and from there to the mainland, should EU citizens still seek to come to the UK, they would have a very large, obvious back door through which to do so.  Given that the drive for Brexit came almost exclusively from a xenophobic hostility to immigration, its unlikely that British governments would leave that door open for long.

Secondly, even if Britain crashes out of the EU on March 29th. it will not crash out of the Good Friday Agreement, unless is specifically decides to do so, thereby breaching a legally enforceable international treaty, into which it had freely entered.  The Good Friday Agreement, commits Britain to not establishing a border in Ireland, and in order to do so, also commits Britain to maintaining the conditions required for their to be no border, i.e. that the regulatory requirements in Northern Ireland are kept in alignment with those in the Irish Republic, i.e. with those of the EU.  If Britain crashes out of the EU on March 29th. without having put in place an agreement to ensure that Northern Ireland remains in regulatory alignment with the EU, it will then be in breach of the Good Friday Agreement, whether it moves to erect a border or not.  That is precisely what the backstop provision in the Withdrawal Agreement was intended to deal with.

Thirdly, the Brexiters, thereby, also do not understand the real basis of the backstop.  The real basis of the backstop is not to prevent the erection of a border in Ireland per se, but is to prevent regulatory divergence between Northern Ireland and the Republic, which is the foundation for there being no border.  The reason that the EU requires such a provision is not just to prevent the erection of a border, so as to comply with the Good Friday Agreement, and the concerns over the possibility of hostility developing into violence against the existence of such a border; it is to prevent a 500 mile backdoor into the EU's single market being created along that border, a trojan horse into the single market that the Brexiters had been trying to sneak through from day 1.   In just the same way that Britain would eventually have to erect a border to stop EU citizens crossing from the republic to the North of Ireland on their way into Britain, so the EU would have to establish a border to stop non-EU goods that do not comply with EU regulations, streaming across the Irish border, and thereby into the EU.

So, when the brexiters say, the backstop, by preventing agreement on the Withdrawal Bill, will lead to a No Deal Brexit, which will lead to the erection of a border, which the Backstop is intended to prevent, they are wrong.  The fundamental reason for the backstop is not to prevent the erection of a border, bust is to protect the EU single market from being undermined by Britain using Norther ireland as a trojan horse into it!  There is absolutely no contradiction, therefore, in the EU continuing to insist on the backstop to prevent Britain pulling off that sleight of hand, of gaining back door entry into the single market.  That is one reason they will not agree to it, and May will get short shrift, in her latest hapless endeavours.

If the EU has to erect a border and police it, to effect that, given that Britain engages in a crash out from the EU, it will do so, and it will rightly blame Britain, for that situation, as Britain will have reneged on its legally binding obligations set out in the Good Friday Agreement.  But, as set out recently, the obvious solution to that situation, and the course of action that would be obvious to the EU, given the large support for staying in the EU expressed by the people of Northern Ireland, would be for the EU and Ireland to press for a border poll so as to bring about a United Ireland.  The EU would be able to offer generous inducements to the people of Northern Ireland to agree to such unification, but given the devastation that would be inflicted on Northern Ireland, in the event of a Brexit crash out, and the introduction of a border, such inducement would probably not be necessary.  Already polls show a majority in favour of a UNited ireland in the event of a No Deal Brexit.  Once again, the brexiters seem to be bluffing in a game of poker, where everyone can see their empty hand.