Brexiters Bricking It

So, Boris's oven ready deal was a turkey, and now his goose is cooked. All of the bull has been exposed, as the Brexiters game of chicken with the EU, has failed. They have made a real pig's ear of the negotiations, and no one is going to save their bacon. The Brexit they promised is tripe. 

On Friday's Newsnight, haulier John Shirley, reported that, deal or no deal, Britain was going to get hammered, as there would be delays at borders, and all the foreign drivers they rely on to bring goods to Britain, and vice versa, were now just not coming, because the time delays and costs were just too great to make it worth their while. Faced with the facts from Shirley, one of the most arrogant of the Brexiters, Peter Bone, appeared to be suffering from a nervous, dry mouth, as he tried to put a brave face on the catastrophe, he and the other Brexiters are about to inflict on the country. 

Neither they, nor Labour, which has also become a Brexit Party, with Starmer now fulfilling the role of Johnson's wing man, on Brexit as on lockdowns, defence of British war criminals, crack downs on immigration, and the advocacy of other reactionary jingoistic policies, seem to have understood that the question is not whether Britain got a trade deal, but whether it continued to have unfettered, friction free access to the single market. A trade deal does not do that; only membership with, or adherence to, the Single Market – which includes recognition of the ECJ, free movement and so on – can achieve that. Even if Britain gets a deal, which at this stage would only be the most minimal of deals, it would not resolve this issue of frictionless borders. 

Even with a comprehensive trade deal, like the much vaunted Canada deal, Britain would still have to have rigorous checks of its goods going to the EU, including into Ireland, as indeed does Canada. A free trade deal only means that a range of goods can be exported without tariffs. But, precisely because of the need to ensure that competition is then fair, the goods being exported have to be verified as complying with the rules and regulations concerning them, such as on their quality, the fact that they have been produced according to agreed environmental standards, agreed standards of workers and consumer rights and so on, and that applies not just to the immediate exporter, but to all of the other people involved in the production of that particular product. The paper work now required for all that will be horrendous imposing huge costs on British producers, as well as the costs of delays. 

The Brexiters never wanted to own up to this, because they continually pushed the delusion that Britain rules the waves, and so could continue to waive the rules, when it comes to its own trade. The ridiculous jingoism was reflected in the absurd statement of Gavin Williamson who presented Britain's desperation to put out a COVID19 vaccine via a rushed process, that was even criticised by the US COVID guru, Doctor Fauci, as being because compared to the EU, or the US, “Britain is better than all of them”. He seemed to forget that this is a vaccine developed by Turkish scientists based in Germany, produced by a US multinational corporation, and manufactured in Belgium, from where it depends on fast, frictionless borders, for it to be transported to Britain! 

De Gaulle would be laughing, because during the 1960's, he warned Europe not to let Britain join the Common Market, famously saying "Non" to the British application, much as macron may do now.  DeGaulle knew that Perfidious Albion always acts in bad faith, and has always acted to try to undermine Europe, whether acting in the interests of its own imperialism, or more latterly as an agent of US imperialism.  Why on Earth would European leaders be taken in by Johnson, who has lived up to that reputation for double dealing already within months of having signed the Withdrawal Agreement?

The facts remain the same. Brexiters continually complain that the EU does not want to accept British sovereignty, but all that really means is that the Brexiters do not want to accept EU sovereignty, which gives it the right to only do a deal that it feels is in its interests not those that suit Britain. There is no such thing as absolute sovereignty, because it depends on your ability to enforce it. The reality is that the continual chest beating about Britain being the sixth biggest national economy in the world, is meaningless, in a world of economic super-states, and economic blocs, not nation states! In a competition between the sovereignty of the UK, and the sovereignty of the EU, the latter will always win, because it is seven times bigger, and even more powerful! 

Britain can choose to exercise its political sovereignty, and thereby cut its nose off to spite its face, which pretty much sums up the Brexit mentality as a whole. It can choose not to do a deal with the EU, on EU terms, to stay in the Single Market, and so on, but then it can also have the sole responsibility for the economic consequences of that action, which will be severely detrimental for Britain, and in the short-term, catastrophic. Does Johnson and the Tories want to own responsibility for that? Probably not, which is why ultimately they are likely to capitulate, and ask for some kind of extension. But, who knows. They may find themselves driven forward by a dynamic beyond their control, especially as, now, they are driven by a reactionary Labour Party, also demanding that Brexit be implemented, and that nationalist rhetoric be ramped up. Whatever happens, now, Labour will have to take as much responsibility for the Brexit disaster as the Tories. Its another factor driving towards a split in Labour, because whilst socialists would always argue for support for Labour, for the reasons set out on many occasions, at an individual level, that does not at all mean having to vote for particular Labour MP's. 

The whole point about the Socialist Campaign for Labour Victory was to argue the need for a Labour Vote, whilst not accepting the inadequate, conservative agenda of Labour itself. It meant arguing for socialist demands, and mobilising support only around those Labour candidates that promoted such a programme. Similarly, whilst I would always argue for support for Labour, I would find it impossible to vote for any Labour candidates standing on a reactionary programme of support for Brexit, or refusing to argue for free movement, and a return to the EU. I suspect, as in the Spring of last year, there will be many Labour members and voters, who came to Labour in order to oppose Brexit, and the rest of the Tories nationalist agenda, who will feel the same way. With Starmer acting as Johnson' wing man, with his Shadow Cabinet stuffed to the gills with right-wing openly pro-capitalist careerists, why would anyone feel a need to vote for that simply as some kind of lesser-evil to the Tories? 

Rachel Reeves on Marr this morning illustrated the point. She continued the mantra about Labour wanting the Tories to push ahead in doing a reactionary Brexit deal. She also continued the have cake and eat it nonsense, claiming that she wanted British fishing fleets to get back complete access to coastal waters, but also wanted them then to be able to continue to have access to the Single Market to sell that fish, even though its precisely the impossibility of that, which forms one of the issues of contention in current negotiations. Its as though they haven't even been listening to the negotiations, and instead just opportunistically form Labour's policy by demanding that the Tories just do more impossible things than they are already committed to. 

The reality remains that, if Britain does collapse into a deal, it will be an inadequate deal that will still leave all the questions about borders unanswered. It will still mean chaos and disruption come 2021. In fact, in many ways, a deal is the worst of all worlds. It differs only in name from No Deal. The only meaningful deal would be one that keeps membership of the Single Market, but unless Johnson capitulates entirely, destroying the Tory Party along with it, in a similar way as the destruction of the Tories over Repeal of the Corn Laws, that is not going to happen in the next two weeks. The best that could be hoped for is that he is forced to go for an extension of the Transition Period, giving the time to sink into such a Brexit In Name Only. Many Tories, goaded by Farage, think that is where Johnson might be headed. Given that the EU has the opportunity to make them look over the precipice, he could get away with it. 

The truth is that Labour should, purely on principle, vote against any Brexit deal, but tactically, also it is the sensible course. If the Tories are forced into the reality of a crash out no deal, they will buckle, because they know the consequences for them would be existential. A crash out would lead to Britain having to cancel Brexit, within weeks, and make a supplicant's appeal for readmission. If there is no sign of a deal next week, the Pound is likely to sell-off hard. Its fall, during the year has been covered by the fact that the Dollar has also been falling against other currencies, and as the Pound has fallen against the Euro, that too has been masked by repeated recoveries, on the hope of a deal, and because Europe has also been hit by the economic effects of imposing its own lockdowns. But, with three weeks still to go before an actual crash-out, with the effects at ports already being felt, a collapsing Pound will put the squeeze on the Tories to concede, sovereignty or no sovereignty.