Opinion

Brexit pushing Ireland towards `two states, one system'

Brexit carries major generational policy and practical implications
Brexit carries major generational policy and practical implications Brexit carries major generational policy and practical implications

CHANCELLOR Philip Hammond’s budget statement on Monday was marked by relative quiet around Brexit. That’s a good indicator that UK/EU negotiations are tiptoeing positively towards a December resolution - though a Westminster `high noon' still awaits.

If you watched carefully and listened closely, the subterranean sounds of hard ground being ploughed in London for a stable, transitional Brexit were audible in summer 2017 – notwithstanding the public melodrama of red lines and deadlines.

Writing in this column 14 months ago on September 6, 2017, I observed: "The critical negotiations have been quiet, intensive and largely unnoticed conversations happening informally in coffee shops and restaurants, private clubs and boardrooms, across Whitehall and the City of London. (A ‘parallel process’ so to speak.) These are the negotiations that are impacting most significantly on Brexit’s trajectory.

"An increasing consensus has been lobbied in Whitehall and the City, across political, financial and security sectors, for a stable and transitional (and whisper it softly, perhaps potentially open-ended) approach to Brexit. Despite the noisy Brussels negotiations, a transitional approach actually suits the EU as much as the UK…

"Deliverables are being distinguished from ‘desirables’. Five years of fuller transition, rather than two years for final walkout. New possibilities of EU engagement, rather than false glories of UK isolation. Making deals, rather than making demands. Symbolically respecting the narrow democratic vote for Brexit, while substantially redefining the actual outcome.”

Now, rewind to the early 1990s. The main histories of the early peace process note that a senior British government representative cited Europe as a consideration during secret discussions with republicans.

The diplomat-cum-spy apparently talked along these lines: “The final solution (for Ireland) is union. It is going to happen anyway. The historical train - Europe - determines that. We are committed to Europe… the island will be as one.”

As with all finessed diplomats, the trick lies in the interpretation. Sometimes the reader sees only what they want, rather than what is said (and unsaid).

“Union” means many things to many people: economic, constitutional, political, cultural, security. Likewise, the “island will be as one” need not mean any change in the constitutional or sovereignty realities.

This anecdote is useful because one issue with much Brexit commentary has been the narrow fixation on tactical waves, rather than strategic tides. Partisan focus on fine detail has sometimes failed to notice important nuances and tones.

The fact remains that Europe’s “historical train” has never travelled in a straight line. Great European battles of war for power have raged repeatedly from the time of Rome two millenia ago, to the horrors of the 20th Century – two world wars, the Cold War, the Balkans atrocities.

By comparison, while Brexit carries major generational policy and practical implications, the peaceful transition of the UK into some new political relationship with the EU is already agreed in principle. The wheel has turned. The parts are moving. Current negotiations are about how to implement those agreed principles. It’s now about the gears and the cams. Even a second poll – a ‘people’s vote’ – would rest upon the transitional deal, not the direction.

Is it still possible that the negotiations will be forced towards crisis by outside spoilers or unforeseen catastrophes? Yes.

But is it more likely that the negotiations will succeed because the inside thinkers have zeroed their sights on achievable outcomes rather than outright victories? Yes.

There’s an old saying that the art of great negotiation always gives the other side an honourable way to retreat.

The key people within the EU and UK negotiating teams seem to have grasped that lesson. With a little stability and space, the odds of a transitional Brexit deal that broadly reflects the needs of all sides are increasing weekly.

Important work will be required to restore diplomatic channels between these islands. Until then, it’s also important that both jurisdictions on Ireland take no steps backwards - economically, politically, socially, or culturally.

Brexit has no conclusion. A process of ongoing (open-ended?) change is now rolling; another page being turned in Europe’s long and complicated history; less dramatic and final than many initially imagined.

As I wrote here over two years ago on June 29, 2016, just one week after the Brexit referendum: "In 1984, it wasn’t Labour that negotiated the Sino-British Joint Declaration at the height of the Cold War, transferring Hong Kong to ‘communist’ China. It was Margaret Thatcher’s government…

“The Hong Kong experience – eventually implemented in 1997 – offers a particularly interesting comparator for future Irish-Anglo relationships. Hong Kong has long been characterised as ‘one country, two systems’. Perhaps Brexit will now push Ireland towards ‘two states, one system’.”

Interesting times.