Editorial of the “World”. No one imagined that a carpet of roses would succeed the chaos of Brexit negotiations, after the agreement signed in extremis, on December 24, 2020, between London and the twenty-seven states of the European Union. But the tensions which manifest themselves in the first weeks of the post-divorce period reflect a worrying deterioration in relations caused by the British choice.
The British fired first by denying the EU ambassador in London diplomatic status, on the pretext that he would not represent a state, but an “international organization”. It was just a taste. In response to the announcement by the laboratory AstraZeneca of a reduction by a quarter of the number of doses promised to the EU by March, the European Commission decided, Friday, January 29, to monitor its export. .
Such a measure entailed re-establishing border controls between the Republic of Ireland (member of the Union) and Northern Ireland (component of the United Kingdom). In doing so, the EU was breaking down the principle of free movement between the two Ireland, guaranteeing the preservation of the fragile peace on the island, a principle in the name of which the Twenty-Seven successfully negotiated for more of four years. In the face of protests in London and Dublin, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, quickly backed down.
Yards to get beaten
Such lightness questions the functioning, consistency and responsibilities of the European executive. His blunder risks leaving traces. Because, to re-establish Ireland’s internal border, the Commission had to trigger the emergency procedure provided for by the Brexit agreement, which allows the EU, as in London, to suspend the provisions governing Irish borders. .
Three days after the European faux pas, the health checks provided for in the agreement between Northern Ireland and Great Britain had to be postponed, after threats of violence against customs officials. By acting recklessly, the European Commission has awakened the demons of the Irish conflict. It has also united the protagonists against it: the unionists, who denounce the controls with the English mother country; the Irish nationalists, because the abolition of the internal border, conquest of the peace agreement of 1998, would be threatened.
The European executive gave yards to get beaten: his blunder is bread blessing for Boris Johnson. It provides arguments to the Prime Minister, who, before the signing of the Brexit agreement, sought to forget his commitment to checks in the Irish Sea.
Trying to push his advantage, he asks for the extension from April 2021 to … 2023 of the “grace period”, authorizing lighter controls, and threatens to trigger in turn the emergency procedure. As the Twenty-Seven insist on the price to be paid for Brexit, Mr Johnson is using the incident to instead underscore his country’s lead on vaccination. The European blunder reinforces the hostility of its voters towards the EU and therefore its popularity.
It is urgent to avoid an escalation between London and the Twenty-Seven, not only to preserve peace in Ireland, but also to avoid the multiplication of disputes prejudicial to both parties. The confrontation on vaccines illustrates this: the United Kingdom is now a frontal competitor of the EU. This is a logical consequence of Brexit. In this new situation, the European Union must defend its interests without weakness, without forgetting that both geography and history condemn the British and Europeans to cooperate.
