Agreed and I think they’re just keeping their options open at the moment until things become a little clearer.
In fairness to the EU it has reached a point where it can't really throw it's weight around more against Russia or China without establishing an EU defence force/army. It's not something I'm personally comfortable with, but can see the logic for it. What concerns me is that some NATO states are being lured away from NATO and towards the European defence project simply because the US wants them to commit about 2.5% gdp to defence spending, while the EU is promising similar mutual defence for 1% with no evidence it can deliver. Whether NATO is still needed/fit for purpose is debatable though.Will likely survive as long as there is a commonality of purpose for it to survive. Europe has a greater investment in seeing it survive but the argument for a common European Defence project is greater than ever and can run alongside NATO. Relying on the US is no longer a viable strategy.
But we are talking wider than just NATO. The interests of the EU countries are not always the interests of the US so the EU has to meet that challenge and develop a more robust foreign policy voice alongside its trade voice given trade is very often a proxy for foreign policy.
It is disappointing that the EU has not spoken out more forcibly on Hong Kong for example but then that is partly our fault. The UK, Australia and Canada have spoken out and ordinarily we would have lobbied the EU as a member and worked on adding their weight to our diplomatic efforts. Now that we are shunning the EU we can no longer do this which weakens our position with China. The US has weighed in but not in a manner that helps HK. The US has said HK is now China therefore sanctions also apply to HK which I don’t imagine is what the UK wants right given that 250,000 Chinese British nationals live there. The US is using HK as a weapon to fight China not help HK or the UK. We have no influence or say on US diplomacy unless the US wants something which isn’t often. We no longer have a say on European diplomacy either. Our loss of influence on a global stage is self evident and self inflicted.
Christ, you're so pendantic.
"Spain", ergo the plant in Barcelona. It's like you're looking for arguments that aren't there or intended.
Barcelona is in Spain, pedant.I’m a stickler for accuracy. I get that it’s a problem for those who are not.
We are all good here thanks; the wife hasn’t seen any new cases for a few days and they are thinking to start opening slowly up over the next 15 days or so. I can only talk about here though as the State Governments are in charge individually.
The article is an opinion piece,on which, understandably Nissan made no comment.https://www.which.co.uk/news/2019/10/brexit-impact-on-cars-what-you-need-to-know/
Nissan, which has a strategic partnership alongside Renault and Mitsubishi, didn’t respond to our request to comment for this article, but it did announce worrying news last week. Nissan warned that a no-deal Brexit could make its European business model unsustainable. It said a 10% export tariff applied from a no-deal exit of the UK from the EU would put its entire European operations ‘in jeopardy’. It operates the UK’s biggest car plant in Sunderland with 7,000 staff, making the popular Nissan Qashqai and Nissan Juke, as well as the electric Nissan Leaf. The new-generation Nissan Juke, designed and manufactured in the UK, is specifically targeted at European markets. Two-thirds of its components come from the EU and 70% of production is destined for the continent.
Read more: https://www.which.co.uk/news/2019/10/brexit-impact-on-cars-what-you-need-to-know/ - Which?
Not sure how stating facts is ‘naivety’. Is that a Brexit thing? The EU is not a major geo political power because it has no competence in areas that would make it so ie Foreign, defence policy etc. The EU’s area is trade policy which it does project successfully beyond the borders of Europe.
That this pandemic may lead to an increase in EU competence is now looking likely. A coordinated health policy would have proven useful in a pandemic and with the desire to shorten production supply chains and have more control on health supplies will accelerate a common Europe wide health competence.
The recovery package, assuming it passes, will also formalise a more federalised monetary policy. The key point though is that like everything in the EU the member states have to agree on it happening and then make it happen. How federalised the EU becomes is in the gift of its sovereign members. Unless they agree on and vote for something to happen then it ain’t happening. Brexiteers never seem to grasp this point. UK politicians never seem to grasp it either hence Frost babbling that his letter was about trying to ‘alert European capitals about what the EU was demanding in negotiations’. European capitals already know. They are the ones who gave Barnier his fucking mandate in the negotiations. What they say goes. In four years of negotiations Brexiteers still haven’t grasped this basic fact.
Can the EU and it’s member states develop into a major geo-political power? Until now it has been content to let the US do the heavy lifting. However the US has disappeared up its own arse and China is filling the gap left by the US and it’s world view is not a pretty one so someone has to counter this with a more enlightened view. The major European countries are not keen on doing so but they are being increasingly forced to protect their interests overseas so again I see this crossroads moment in world leadership forcing the EU into exerting a bigger influence in foreign policy. Historically the EU has evolved faster in a crisis with the temporary becoming permanent. The pandemic and the US self immolating are the stimuli forcing this current evolution.
This leaves three European countries outside of the European norm. Russia, Belarus and the UK, we will assume the UK goes full Russia. How do these countries deal with an expanding EU and potentially a more coordinated EU in areas like foreign policy and defence? Belarus is in the Russian orbit and Russia is seen to be increasingly dependent on China given the EU countries won’t play ball with them. Ukrainian EU membership in 2024 will increase tensions and deepen Russian frustration that the EU never gave them the special status they felt was their right as a former superpower (echoes of the UK). China is now Russia’s biggest trade partner although Germany is still second despite EU sanctions.
If Russia gravitates into the Chinese camp I guess the only camp left for the UK (assuming it remains intact) is the US camp. China will be out given current tensions over HK, Covid-19, and the EU will be out given the Govt is now allergic to all things European despite our reliance on Europe. The Brexit playbook didn’t have it playing out like this. Our exit was meant to trigger the breakup of the EU and Global Britain would then lead the confused, weary nations of Europe out of the darkness and into the light blah, blah.
Personally I think we will be in the US camp but symbolically rather than practically. We will sign a US deal that yields some low hanging fruit and will it be hailed as a triumph In the same way we hailed our handling of the pandemic as a triumph (although not so much these days) and no doubt there will be some deal with the EU that allows us to keep the country running and it too will be hailed as a triumph no matter the actual substance.
Countries can live on pretence and slogans. It’s only when something serious turns up that it exposes the shallowness behind it and even then some people will still refuse to look behind the curtain.
…...…………... The big three US, China and EU will be in a political and trade battle after Covid 19. The shape of the world, working practices in the developed world etc are all going to be changed by Covid 19. To pretend this has no impact on current UK/EU negotiations and relations is just dumb.
Well I may not be an expert and I have not had to consider this challenge - I suspect that you are not either, but.....Try selling Nissans into the Eu when they're subject to tariffs ...... try assembling them when 70% of the parts come from the Eu .
You seemed perturbed that I mentioned naivety - I am seeking to be factual and not insultingNot sure how stating facts is ‘naivety’. Is that a Brexit thing? The EU is not a major geo political power because it has no competence in areas that would make it so ie Foreign, defence policy etc. The EU’s area is trade policy which it does project successfully beyond the borders of Europe.
That this pandemic may lead to an increase in EU competence is now looking likely. A coordinated health policy would have proven useful in a pandemic and with the desire to shorten production supply chains and have more control on health supplies will accelerate a common Europe wide health competence.
The recovery package, assuming it passes, will also formalise a more federalised monetary policy. The key point though is that like everything in the EU the member states have to agree on it happening and then make it happen. How federalised the EU becomes is in the gift of its sovereign members. Unless they agree on and vote for something to happen then it ain’t happening. Brexiteers never seem to grasp this point. UK politicians never seem to grasp it either hence Frost babbling that his letter was about trying to ‘alert European capitals about what the EU was demanding in negotiations’. European capitals already know. They are the ones who gave Barnier his fucking mandate in the negotiations. What they say goes. In four years of negotiations Brexiteers still haven’t grasped this basic fact.
Can the EU and it’s member states develop into a major geo-political power? Until now it has been content to let the US do the heavy lifting. However the US has disappeared up its own arse and China is filling the gap left by the US and it’s world view is not a pretty one so someone has to counter this with a more enlightened view. The major European countries are not keen on doing so but they are being increasingly forced to protect their interests overseas so again I see this crossroads moment in world leadership forcing the EU into exerting a bigger influence in foreign policy. Historically the EU has evolved faster in a crisis with the temporary becoming permanent. The pandemic and the US self immolating are the stimuli forcing this current evolution.
This leaves three European countries outside of the European norm. Russia, Belarus and the UK, we will assume the UK goes full Russia. How do these countries deal with an expanding EU and potentially a more coordinated EU in areas like foreign policy and defence? Belarus is in the Russian orbit and Russia is seen to be increasingly dependent on China given the EU countries won’t play ball with them. Ukrainian EU membership in 2024 will increase tensions and deepen Russian frustration that the EU never gave them the special status they felt was their right as a former superpower (echoes of the UK). China is now Russia’s biggest trade partner although Germany is still second despite EU sanctions.
If Russia gravitates into the Chinese camp I guess the only camp left for the UK (assuming it remains intact) is the US camp. China will be out given current tensions over HK, Covid-19, and the EU will be out given the Govt is now allergic to all things European despite our reliance on Europe. The Brexit playbook didn’t have it playing out like this. Our exit was meant to trigger the breakup of the EU and Global Britain would then lead the confused, weary nations of Europe out of the darkness and into the light blah, blah.
Personally I think we will be in the US camp but symbolically rather than practically. We will sign a US deal that yields some low hanging fruit and will it be hailed as a triumph In the same way we hailed our handling of the pandemic as a triumph (although not so much these days) and no doubt there will be some deal with the EU that allows us to keep the country running and it too will be hailed as a triumph no matter the actual substance.
Countries can live on pretence and slogans. It’s only when something serious turns up that it exposes the shallowness behind it and even then some people will still refuse to look behind the curtain.
2016: "The EU is going to become more federalised and we oppose this process and why we feel the UK should be out of it"You seemed perturbed that I mentioned naivety - I am seeking to be factual and not insulting
In your post you were again a couple of times, most obviously with:
"The recovery package, assuming it passes, will also formalise a more federalised monetary policy. The key point though is that like everything in the EU the member states have to agree on it happening and then make it happen. How federalised the EU becomes is in the gift of its sovereign members."
Yeah, that is exactly how Italy are going to be feel - not
The reality is that they will be forced to becuse they will be over a barrel - it could also be described as exploitation - a form of blackmail
You are just so in thrall you not only choose to concede what is obvious - you seek to bamboozle others
Well I may not be an expert and I have not had to consider this challenge - I suspect that you are not either, but.....
Ahead of making this decision and announcement there will be some people, who are experts, employed to do just that
Fuck sake, the force is strong today. Have you all been on the juice?
You are weird sometimes, I think that you sometimes argue for arguing's sake and you just object to facts being pointed out unless by yourself - you say...……….
"Not sure how stating facts is ‘naivety’. Is that a Brexit thing? The EU is not a major geo political power because it has no competence in areas that would make it so ie Foreign, defence policy etc. The EU’s area is trade policy which it does project successfully beyond the borders of Europe."
That is what I am saying - but it sees itself as developing into a geopolitical power - that is its aspiration and this is clearly evidenced in its actions and plans - i.e. to establish the competences required - foreign policy, forces etc.
This exchange started when I picked you up for positioning as a power alongside China and the US in this post:
They are your words and whilst you may now choose to emphasise trade as its current competence - that is not the extent of the EU's ambitions and this is evident to any objective review.
There is much to confirm the aspirations of the EU, e.g.
"In light of a changing security environment, the EU Global Strategy for Foreign and Security Policy (EUGS) started a process of closer cooperation in security and defence. EU Member States agreed to step up the European Union’s work in this area and acknowledged the need for enhanced coordination, increased investment and more cooperation in developing defence capabilities.
https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-Homepage/34226/permanent-structured-cooperation-pesco-factsheet_en
The key difference between us appears to me that you seem to be conveniently suggesting that the development of the EU as a coordinated political power across Europe will be derived from the response to this pandemic
I say - utter bollocks - this has been the plan for many years
You seemed perturbed that I mentioned naivety - I am seeking to be factual and not insulting
In your post you were again a couple of times, most obviously with:
"The recovery package, assuming it passes, will also formalise a more federalised monetary policy. The key point though is that like everything in the EU the member states have to agree on it happening and then make it happen. How federalised the EU becomes is in the gift of its sovereign members."
Yeah, that is exactly how Italy are going to be feel - not
The reality is that they will be forced to becuse they will be over a barrel - it could also be described as exploitation - a form of blackmail
You are just so in thrall you not only choose to concede what is obvious - you seek to bamboozle others
2016: "The EU is going to become more federalised and we oppose this process and why we feel the UK should be out of it"
"No it isn't, it's a dangerous fantasy!"
2020: Am I a joke to you?
I think it was pointed out to you on numerous occasions that Brexit would lead to a federal Europe. We don’t fear a federal Europe, we just didn’t want to be a part of it. Now that the Brits are out of the way you can crack on building your superstate which was always the plan. Here’s my question, what do you think the response of the people of Europe will be when the penny drops that they are no longer sovereign nations?For the EU to federalise to any degree it would have needed UK consent as a member. A federalised Europe stretching from the Atlantic to the Russian border with us stuck in isolation 22 miles offshore with no say or influence on how such a beast develops? It’s a hard no from me.
It will be ironic though if Brexit helps create what most Brexiteers fear.
The argument was that leavers have been considered liars whenever we mentioned that this was the future of Europe, and dissenters saying that this was never a reality. You must have missed that.For the EU to federalise to any degree it would have needed UK consent as a member. A federalised Europe stretching from the Atlantic to the Russian border with us stuck in isolation 22 miles offshore with no say or influence on how such a beast develops? It’s a hard no from me.
It will be ironic though if Brexit helps create what most Brexiteers fear.
I thought you lot thought the EU would break up and Brexit would help it on its way.I think it was pointed out to you on numerous occasions that Brexit would lead to a federal Europe. We don’t fear a federal Europe, we just didn’t want to be a part of it. Now that the Brits are out of the way you can crack on building your superstate which was always the plan. Here’s my question, what do you think the response of the people of Europe will be when the penny drops that they are no longer sovereign nations?