As trade talks with the UK ground to deadlock on Dec. 9, one EU official summed up the mood in Brussels, writing in a memo: “The Brits ... are taking us for a ride, we must remain firm.”
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had just met for dinner in the Berlaymont building, the headquarters of the 27-nation EU’s executive branch, and failed to resolve blockages on fisheries and competition policy.
Even though those differences and many others were on Thursday resolved with a deal to avert a cliff-edge rupture to a US$900 billion trade relationship, the pattern of mutual mistrust highlighted by the memo, seen by reporters, remains.
Illustration: Yusha
That mistrust is likely to bedevil future relations as the UK and EU address a huge slate of unfinished business ranging from trade in services to cooperation on criminal matters and security.
“Unfortunately, trust is not something that will come overnight,” a senior EU diplomat based in Brussels said.
The economic consequences of the UK’s acrimonious break from its historic European allies will likely be painfully evident — but the geostrategic implications will arguably be even greater.
For one of Europe’s main military and economic powers to shun the EU as the bloc tries to become a coherent counterweight to Russian and Chinese assertiveness will likely diminish Europe’s transatlantic community with the US and Canada.
The UK formally left the EU in January, 47 years after joining the European Communities and three-and-a-half years after its Brexit referendum, but then entered a transition period during which rules on commerce and travel were frozen until the end of this year.
EU officials and diplomats described the talks to put a post-transition trade deal in place, as an exhausting exercise of bluff and brinksmanship.
On the EU side, the 27 member states remained united under EU Head of Task Force for Relations with the UK Michel Barnier, an unflinching defender of their single market of 450 million people.
The British side was harder to gauge, because it sometimes sought to exploit differences between member states and often appeared to be guided by the vagaries of domestic politics, the EU officials said.
Yet to mass-circulation newspapers at home and Brexit ideologues in his government, Johnson’s tough line with Brussels on competition rules and access to UK waters for EU fishing boats was applauded as a much-needed assertion of sovereignty.
The UK has always been ambivalent about the project to unite and rebuild Europe from the ashes of World War II.
It joined, belatedly, in 1973, but its economic liberalism jarred with much of continental Europe, and it never joined the single currency, the euro, or the Schengen zone of passport-free travel.
British euroskepticism was for decades fanned by much of its press, whose members — including Johnson, a Daily Telegraph correspondent in Brussels from 1989 to 1994 — panned the federalist ambitions of “eurocrats” and lampooned the EU’s regulatory zeal.
Johnson once poked fun in an opinion column at rules that, according to him, forbade the recycling of a teabag or children under eight blowing up balloons.
For many Britons, Brexit has an intellectual rationale: The UK should cut loose from the stagnating economies of the EU and compete with a project that they are convinced is destined to fail.
Yet the UK’s uneasy relationship with the EU has been controversial at home, too.
Then-British prime minister Margaret Thatcher’s aggression toward Brussels led to a UK Conservative party coup that ended her time in office in 1990.
The 2016 Brexit referendum gamble, made by then-British prime minister David Cameron, led to his departure and, with voters split 52 to 48 percent, polarized British society.
On the other side of the English Channel, many have long thought that the UK is simply a poor fit.
Former French president Charles de Gaulle twice vetoed the UK’s attempts to join what was then the European Economic Community in the 1960s.
Five decades later, French President Emmanuel Macron pressed for a swift British exit after the referendum, worried that euroskeptic sentiment could seep across the continent.
The UK’s boldest step during the trade talks came last summer, when an inner circle around Johnson met to figure a way out of the deadlock. Their solution: trigger a crisis.
In the words of one source close to the group, they decided to “put a gun on the table” by drafting legislation that would explicitly override parts of the withdrawal agreement, the divorce treaty that the UK had already signed with the EU.
Several British officials told reporters that the internal market bill had been a shock tactic to counter what they saw as EU efforts to prevent the UK winning back its “sovereignty” before its final exit from the bloc’s orbit on Jan. 31, but the move made Brussels all the more determined to make sure that it could enforce a trade deal.
Von der Leyen spelled it out: “Trust is good, but law is better ... And crucially, in light of recent experience, a strong governance system is essential to ensure that what has been agreed is actually done.”
Sources said that the strategists behind the gambit included some who felt that the UK had been humiliated in earlier talks and were determined not to let that happen again.
Britain’s tabloid press was indignant last year when Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May — another Conservative prime minister to fall victim to the struggle over Europe — had to sit outside a summit meeting room for hours while, as the Sun newspaper put it: “EU leaders gorged on langoustine and duckling.”
At a summit in Salzburg, Austria, a year earlier, then-European Council president Donald Tusk posted a picture on Instagram of himself at a cake stand alongside May with the caption: “A piece of cake, perhaps? Sorry, no cherries.”
The jibe referred to a plan proposed by May for the withdrawal agreement that the EU had publicly trashed as cherry-picking the benefits of membership — and to Johnson’s belief that the UK could do just that, “have its cake and eat it.”
“The cake business certainly had an impact,” a British source said.
Some saw it as tasteless, because May is diabetic.
A source involved in the divorce talks last year said that, when the delegations broke for refreshments, they would often sit on opposite sides of the room, glaring at each other in silence.
Rancor over the internal market bill set the tone for negotiation as the end-year deadline loomed.
A spat broke out on Twitter between the UK Head of Taskforce Europe David Frost and the usually smooth Barnier. Both sides dug in on fishing rights, ways to settle future disputes and “level playing-field” rules to guarantee fair competition, including state aid to companies.
The UK in October declared that it was breaking off negotiations entirely.
However, a week later, they resumed, after Brussels acknowledged that both sides needed to compromise — a signal that London hailed as evidence that its strategy had worked.
Johnson’s dinner on Dec. 9 with Von der Leyen and the two chief negotiators — ironically including turbot, a flatfish found in British waters — threw up a sharp contrast between the two sides as photographs taken beforehand went viral.
On one side stood the EU’s elegantly dressed German president and its French negotiator; on the other, Johnson in an ill-fitting suit with his trademark tousled hair and his negotiator wearing a tie that had been tied too short.
A UK source said that Johnson had gone in with proposals and been “genuinely trying to find a route to a solution,” but he had been stonewalled and left with a sense that “things were very gloomy.”
Another source close to the talks said that Johnson’s affability had failed to charm the more formal Von der Leyen.
“I don’t believe either would normally invite the other to a dinner party. Chalk and cheese,” the source said.
The EU memo sent after the dinner said that London appeared to be trying to squeeze out concessions by declaring that it was prepared to leave without a deal.
It took another two weeks of negotiations, stretching into evenings and over weekends, to find an agreement.
One EU diplomat close to the negotiations said that the past four-and-a-half years had been a “tiresome melodrama” that had dented goodwill and sapped enthusiasm for any further talks.
“The divorce was meant to be amicable. But our estranged spouse went mad and that didn’t go smoothly,” he said. “One way or another, we are still going to be stuck together. Loveless.”
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past