The United States puts the strangulation chain on the British threat to invoke Article 16 to re-trade the Brexit Ireland agreement

When other political parties fulfilled their threats, it was really gratifying to see the government caught off guard. The latest example is that the United States was very clear during the Brexit negotiations and repeatedly stated to the United Kingdom that if the United Kingdom wants to reach a trade agreement with the United States, it should not touch the third track of the “Good Friday Agreement.”

The new question is, if anything, as the United Kingdom talks about invoking Article 16 to force the renegotiation of provisions related to Northern Ireland, the United States has escalated its hardline attitude. Before the MPs, the loudest was Nancy Pelosi, who said how they would approve any trade agreement if Britain violated God’s Friday agreement. The Financial Times reported that the government is now acting as an enforcer.

This story is an exclusive report by the Financial Times. As of now, we have not seen any original input from other media, so please forgive the dependence on pink paper. The source of the sense of urgency is that the UK is now at a disadvantage relative to the EU, because now only the UK is affected by some tariffs imposed during the Trump era.

Politico outlined the issue and expressed Britain’s concern that its trade agreement would reduce these tariffs, but has become a hostage to the dispute between Britain and the European Union over Northern Ireland.

For those who have not paid close attention to the never-ending Brexit, this is a very simplified version. The point of contention is that Northern Ireland is governed by EU rules in trade-related matters to avoid forming a hard border with the Republic of Ireland. However, this caused difficulties in the transportation of goods between Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom. In fact, being economically linked to the EU is a boon for Northern Ireland:

However, radical Protestants are not satisfied with the Irish influence of perfidy (not that they are capable or will participate in IRA-level election campaigns, but there have been some car bombings). But the real driving force of this train is the Conservative Party theorists who want to free Britain from the European Court of Justice’s limited and so far theoretical jurisdiction over certain Northern Ireland affairs.

About a month later, the government threatened to invoke Article 16, which, among other things, would make Britain retaliate against its alleged suffering. The European Union soon offered tailor-made concessions on trade in goods between the UK and Northern Ireland, but it also made it clear that the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice is not negotiable.

By the way, we pointed out at the time that the British threat is not as smart as it seems. The EU can also retaliate under Article 16, and it has many informal ways to retaliate outside of Article 16.

Britain (such as Lord Frost) made a strong hint that Britain will soon trigger the 16th trigger. Some political experts think so in order to put some pressure on Johnson to let the government become “in power” in the face of supply shortages. But it all calmed down. Maybe now we know why.

From politics:

Westminster worries that Brexit has not only failed to improve Anglo-US trade, it will make trade more difficult.

US President Joe Biden warned Britain to proceed with caution in the post-Brexit trade agreement between Northern Ireland, the United Kingdom and the European Union, and worried that uneasiness would endanger the country’s hard-won peace. But the British government has been threatening to trigger the nuclear clause in the agreement, which may lead to its collapse.

At the same time, the United States continues to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum, which were first imposed during the Donald Trump administration. Britain has been unable to get rid of tariffs-although Washington reached an agreement with Brussels a month ago to end the same war-it will make a new call when its top trade minister visits Washington next week.

“This is another example of the British industry paying a price for Boris Johnson’s botched Brexit agreement,” said Stephen Kinnock, the shadow foreign minister who represents the Aberavon steel manufacturing seat in Wales. He said that tariffs are a simple method that can cause pain to the UK on the agreement…

Sam Lowe, a trade expert at Flint Global, agrees that additional work is being put into the agreement. He said: “Although this is not the only reason why the United Kingdom finds it difficult to reach an agreement with the United States to remove tariffs on steel and aluminum, as the European Union has done,” he said, “the ongoing deadlock in Northern Ireland has undoubtedly made things more difficult. .”

Financial Times Provide evidence to support these suspicions:

As Washington is worried about London’s threats to change Northern Ireland’s post-Brexit trade rules, the United States is delaying the removal of Trump’s tariffs on British steel and aluminum.

Brussels and Washington have repeatedly warned London that unilateral changes to the EU-UK agreement to exit the EU in 2020 may threaten peace on the island of Ireland.

In a communication seen by the British Financial Times, an official from the US Department of Commerce stated that negotiations with the UK on easing metal tariffs could not proceed.

The official cited the U.S.’s concern that the U.K. threatened to trigger Article 16, which is a safeguard clause in the post-Brexit Northern Ireland agreement. Goods destined for Northern Ireland are inspected.

The communication stated that Washington had informed the United Kingdom of the reasons for the obstruction. Three people familiar with the matter also said that after Congress put pressure on the British threat to trigger the clause, the negotiations were deadlocked.

When I read this article, the government did not simply say “We will not waste time on agreements rejected by Congress.” It sounds like the government is stating that its views are the same. If the UK were to upset the Irish Protocol, it would not seek to reach a trade agreement.

This article includes official “no comment” from the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative, the National Security Council’s claim that there is no connection between the Irish Protocol dispute and the U.S.-UK trade negotiations (as if they are in this particular cycle), and a large number of complaints from the U.K. Department of Trade . Some people think that the United States does not want to be seen as profligate in third-party relationships of so-called close allies, but otherwise it would be boring to become a superpower.

In fact, Britain may already be in trouble with the United States. Anyone who has been paying close attention to this quarrel or who has spoken to EU diplomats will find that the United Kingdom is proposing to violate a treaty it has just signed or even touted as a major agreement. This is first-class malicious behavior. For Irish supporters in the United States, it has caused a specter of why the United Kingdom should be given a trade agreement, because once it is in hand, it can destroy the Irish Protocol at will without punishment. For cosmetic reasons, the United States cannot associate the provisions of the British treaty with the continued good conduct of the Irish protocol, even in the unlikely event that the United Kingdom accepts such a request.

Therefore, the UK may have fully supported the US trade agreement, at least unless and until the Republicans came to power. But the Irish Mafia may be so powerful that even if the Democratic Party is in the minority, it can prevent Congress from approving it. And I don’t understand how the UK sounded the alarm after it upgraded to the European Union and made the unacceptable response that the UK has always expressed. stay tuned.

Source link