The end of the year is a time for closure and new beginnings. As this year winds down, that is certainly the case with Brexit. Following the victory of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party in the general election this month, it is now clear that the UK is to leave the EU on Jan. 31.
For many, the occasion would be tinged with regret, but it also represents an opportunity to forge a new UK-EU partnership. Besides, things could have been much worse. Owing to the withdrawal agreement that was concluded in October, a destructive “hard” Brexit has been averted.
Since the beginning of the Brexit negotiations, the EU side — the 27 member states and the European Parliament — has not strayed from the bloc’s core interests nor lost sight of the need for unity and solidarity. The EU’s priority was first and foremost to secure the rights of European citizens, including by finding a solution for the people of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, for whom the negotiations were about peace and stability, not just trade and the economy.
Illustration: Mountain People
Throughout the process, it has protected the EU single market and its guarantees for consumers, public and animal health standards, and safeguards against fraud and trafficking. It also did the utmost to preserve a climate of trust between the EU and the UK, and to lay a solid foundation for a new partnership.
In accordance with its own wishes, the UK would no longer participate in EU institutions as of Feb. 1, but it would remain in the single market and the customs union at least until the end of next year. The free movement of people between the EU and the UK would continue, which means that it would be business as usual for citizens, consumers, businesses, students and researchers on both sides of the channel over the next year.
Moreover, with the transition period, there would be time to implement practical measures to guarantee EU and UK citizens’ rights, establish the customs and border arrangements agreed in Northern Ireland, and start to negotiate an agreement on the future relationship. However, in the absence of a decision by the UK before July to extend the transition period — which Johnson has ruled out — a deal on the future relationship would have to be concluded in less than 11 months.
That would be immensely challenging, but the EU will give it its all, even if it would not be able to achieve everything. Never would it be the EU that fails on common ambition.
RESOLUTIONS
Since it is the time for new year’s resolutions, negotiators should set three goals to achieve by this time next year. First, the EU and the UK must ensure that they have the means to work together and discuss joint solutions to global challenges. The UK might be leaving the EU, but it is not leaving Europe.
As European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently put it: “Whatever the future holds, the bond and the friendship between our people are unbreakable.”
From addressing climate change and promoting effective multilateralism, to defending their homelands and countering those who choose violence over peaceful solutions, the EU and UK share essential interests and values. That is why the EU would continue to engage positively with the UK, both bilaterally and in global forums such as the UN, the WTO and the G20.
Consider climate change. Next year, the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) is to take place in Glasgow, Scotland. Setting ambitious targets would require a strong common position. If the EU and the UK cannot align on such a critical issue, there is little hope that others around the world would be able to do so.
COOPERATION
Second, the UK and the EU need to build a close security relationship. Here, too, the UK’s departure from the EU has consequences. The strong security cooperation that EU member states have put in place is linked to the free movement of people.
It works because there are common rules, common supervision mechanisms and a common European Court of Justice. Because EU countries trust each other and are assured that their fundamental rights are protected, they are able to share data extensively and implement integrated solutions.
The same degree of cooperation is simply not possible with a third country that is outside of the Schengen area. Neither the EU nor the UK can guarantee its security without looking beyond its borders and building alliances. Tackling terrorism, cyberattacks and other attempts to undermine democracies would require a joint effort.
The lives of EU citizens depend on the ability to count on each other. That is why there can be no trade-off on our mutual security. This should be an unconditional commitment from both sides. EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell agrees.
Third, by this time next year, there needs to be an economic partnership that reflects common interests, geographical proximity and interdependence. In the “political declaration” agreed in October alongside the withdrawal agreement, the UK government made clear that it would pursue a free-trade agreement with the EU, and rejected the idea that it would remain in the EU customs union. That means the UK and the EU would become two separate markets.
The EU — including European Commissioner for Trade Phil Hogan — would engage in these negotiations in a positive spirit, with the willingness to make the most of the short time available. However, like the UK, the EU would keep its strategic interests in mind.
It knows that competing on social and environmental standards — rather than on skills, innovation and quality — leads only to a race to the bottom that puts workers, consumers and the planet on the losing side. Thus, any free-trade agreement must provide for a level playing field on standards, state aid and tax matters.
These are the EU’s three goals for next year: to maintain a capacity to cooperate closely at the global level; to forge a strong security partnership; and to negotiate a new economic agreement (which, most likely, would have to be expanded in the years to come). If these three objectives are achieved, the negotiators would have made the most of the next year.
As soon as they receive their mandate from the 27 EU member states, the EU team would be ready to negotiate in a constructive spirit with the UK — a country that the EU would always regard as a friend, ally and partner.
Michel Barnier is a former vice president of the European Commission and French minister of foreign affairs. He is EU chief negotiator for the UK exiting the EU.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with