Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
After Brexit
#1
After Brexit

Will it be Johnson or will it be Hunt? Frankly I don't care. Both have a reputation for being a little bit detached from the truth. 
In my opinion the UK is heading for a "no deal" at the end of October simply because there are not enough British politicians with the good sense and the courage to stop it. I also believe that "no deal" will be extremely damaging economically to both the EU and to the UK but that the UK will bear the brunt of this. I do not forget either that damage will be caused is so many other areas apart from economics. My question - and the purpose of this thread - is how will all this affect attitudes in Europe and within the UK?

In Europe: many EU citizens are already exasperated by the UK's actions. Will this be translated into anger and hostility when people start losing jobs as a result of Brexit? Will Europeans come to see Brexit as a hostile act?

In the UK: My guess is that Brexiters will very briefly celebrate their independence only to be confronted in very short order with severe economic disruption. Will they (1) admit that they made a mistake? (2) blame the EUSSR? (3) blame remainers for sabotaging their beautiful project? My guess is (2) and (3).
How will people react when, having fought so long for something they finally get and then realise that almost everything they just dismissed as "project fear" is project reality. It will really be like smashing their heads into a brick wall but will they blame their heads or the wall.
Remainers are going to be mightily angry. Will they (1) try to make a success of Brexit or (2) lash out at Brexiters. My guess is (2)
A UK friend recently told me that "we need to find a way to bring the country back together" but despaired of a solution. Personally I don't see anyway the UK will avoid entrenched division;

What are your thoughts?
Reply
#2
This process will have to be lived by the British, until they get to the 70's of the last century, their salvation will be again the EU (or USE Smile ).
When they get to the top, it will be time for Brexit II.
Reply
#3
There is no after Brexit.

Brexit is the process which only begins once they have left and it leads to they know not where, nor when.

There is however an 'after the WA' which will begin at the end of October. 

But it is like that image of a black hole, you can make out the surrounding edge, you can discern the way in but you cannot see what happens inside.  

No information can leave a black hole, there is similarly no information coming out of the UK about beyond the event horizon, the WA, there is no information about What Is Brexit?


(Sorry about that, I came over a bit astronomical)
Reply
#4
Hi BBG

As far as the response to no deal Brexit in the other MS is concerned, I would tend to think that in the first place, relief would be felt on a political level because of the awareness that the EU faces many other challenges that have to be dealt with, without the constant can-kicking on the British side. For the industries and their employees affected by it, it would depend of how the various interest and political groups would spin it for their own purposes. I can't really foresee much anger because those concerned must already be aware of the risks and the Brexit debate has been on for so long that it will hardly qualify as a shock. It might be used as an excuse for other unpopular decisions. Deviousness doesn't belong to the Brits only.

It might depend also on the countries concerned. I have the French mood in mind. Strangely enough, the French might be less angry than other countries like Germany or the NL because, even though there is more goodwill and sympathy toward the British people that the British media would allow (no hatred at all as is often described), there always has been a not inconsiderable distrust in British ruling class. Add to that, the rather large number of British citizens living in harmony with their French neighbours, who will never be considered as anything but the victims of their own government/opposition. Probably, the French are among the less disappointed by Brexit in the EU. They are more in the "We told you so" mood, mixed with a certain bewilderment/amusement as well as irritation at the procrastination. And also the sense that the British-French relations will subside whatever happens because we are close neighbours and have known many avatars of the relations in the past (friendly, hostile, cold, warm,... but close nonetheless). 

Of course, I cannot substantiate this by any means. Call it a "Impression au soleil levant".
Reply
#5
I want Brexit to be over already. I've still been following it, but with a certain sense of fatigue. Everything that's going to happen in the next months, has already happened in the months preceding the 29th of March. A new prime minister just doesn't matter at all, the situation hasn't changed.

As much as I know no deal will hurt everyone, I think it should happen, and it basically should've happened already. I'm still somewhat irritated that Macron had so little backing for his point of view back in April, but honestly, it's even more frustrating that the UK, through its utter incompetence, is forcing the EU to pull the final trigger on no deal. 

But let's not forget this: the EU, without the UK, is also facing huge crises. I believe the sicknesses that we see manifest themselves so clearly in the UK with Brexit, has also infested continental European countries and its politicians. Maybe not on their level, but it's approaching quickly. The same insanity, the same corrupt establishment, etc... 

Honestly, we as continental Europeans should really not be glib here, thinking that this level of insanity, incompetence and idiocy is only possible in the UK. When we see what's happening there, we are looking at ourselves in a mirror. We are looking at what's going to happen to our own countries in a couple of years if we do not pay attention. The only hope I have is that no deal Brexit will be such a shock to the system of all European countries, so we can avoid sleepwalking into a similar disaster in our societies.
Reply
#6
Lessons from Slovenia

(21-06-19, 11:15 AM)Blackbeard's Ghost Wrote: how will all this affect attitudes in Europe and within the UK?

Ghost, I think that something similar to what has happened in Yugoslavia with also happen re Brexit.

I learned from experience that after pulling out of a union, nations drift apart remarkably quickly, even where there used to be close connections. And that nations which made a good decision on the right side of history based on high national unity are able to move on, whereas those on the other side remain stuck in their own destructively divisive hell for decades to come.

So I agree with you that the act of Brexit - and it will be a no deal, it seems - will have a short-term damaging effect for the EU27. But things will soon return to normal and we will move on. And the UK will move out of what we the EU27 people perceive as 'our Europe'.

Remember how before the Brexit tantrum, there used to be meetings of the big three - Germany, France and the UK - before each important decision in the EU. The UK was much more than just 'sitting at the table'. The last meetings of this troika were in the format Merkel-Hollande-Cameron. After the Leave vote, they ended. First the troika became Germany-France-Italy (Merkel-Hollande-Renzi), but then Italy derailed into its own counter-productive tantrum so now we have Merkel-Macron.

The UK has been in effect already sidelined in the EU. This is less noticeable only because there is at present still all this debate about Brexit (and because the UK is still coming to EU meetings). Where in the EU27 Brexit is not all that very interesting anymore; only the Brits debate it constantly. This Thursday and Friday, the EU leaders only spent half an hour on Brexit - in the 27 format, without the UK.

So I expect the EU27 people to soon largely 'forget' about Brexit. The businesses which used to be linked to the UK market will adopt and re-align (using also the large EU27 market as a buffer plus the 'empty space' in sales to other countries under EU's FTAs left after the UK rips up all these trade agreements plus EU's new trade deals with Canada, Japan and Mercosur). There will be fewer connections with the UK and more with others. Additional customs controls with the UK will become normal.

Ireland will feel the disruption most. Here I think that things will be settled with reunification. probably quite quickly. Then united Ireland will be able to move on too, finally free from the UK chains. When Ireland settles to the new normal, Brexit will be regarded as a good thing.

GB will quickly become quite irrelevant to the EU27. It will not participate in the EU debates anymore. We will keep following news from Poland, Italy, Spain etc. with interest because they are a part of our shared Europe, it matters to the rest of us what is going on there, in many ways. But GB will be out of all this. We will only pay some more attention to the UK if it descends into a very nasty fascist regime (which it is on the way of doing) and/or if its special relationship with the US poses new threats to us (likely that the US will install new military bases in GB, on the western flank of the EU superpower). But we will be detached from this, this will not really be 'our' news, a bit like the way we follow developments in Ukraine.

For the UK, Brexit will be a hard encounter with reality. It will keep destructively polluting politics, economy and much more (including divided families and friends) for decades to come.


Lessons of history. In Slovenia, we made a united decision to exit Yugoslavia in 1990 (as a measure of last resort; exit referendum with 95% yes at 93% turnout). We were out in 1991. We even had a ten-day war in effect with Serbia. It was tough for some time, but we never looked back. We remained united. We did the right thing.

With exit from Yugoslavia and in particular because other parts descended into wars, Slovenia largely lost and quite abruptly our shared Yugoslav market on which we used to place 60% of our exports (the Yugoslav internal market was very similar to the EU single market). But we had friends in the EU (i.e. western Europe) and were thus able to re-align our economy - we exported less than we used to to exYu, but more than we used to to the EU.

These graphs show how Slovenia re-oriented its exports after exit from the Yugoslav union and loss of a large part of exports to the Yugoslav market due to this disruption, and quite quickly so:

[Image: attachment.php?aid=234]
Image URL: http://debateuncensored.co.uk/attachment.php?aid=234

The top graph shows Slovenia's exports to our top five destinations.

In the bottom graph, I included the following countries in the three EU groups regardless if they were already in the EU in the respective year shown on the graph (for example, Hungary only joined the EU in 2004, but it is included already in the column for 1990 in the 'New EU-11' group):
  • Old EU-15: Germany, Italy, Austria, France
  • Old EU-15: other - Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom
  • New EU-11 - Bulgaria, Czechia, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia
Yugoslavia was not behind the Iron Curtain and it had good political and economic relationships in the Cold-War environment both with the west and the east. Before exit, Slovenia's main export destination was to other parts of our shared Yugoslav market (some 60% of our exports), whereas our five most important foreign export partners were Germany, Italy France and Austria (together about 25%) and the Soviet Union (6%). 

At the time of our exit, Yugoslavia was sinking into an economic crisis, but western Europe was in quite a good economic condition as well as supportive of newly independent Slovenia, so due to these friendly relationships and relatively small size of Slovenia and hence a small amount of our 'additional' exports compared to the large western-European market western Europe was able to absorb our re-directed exports (compare our export destinations in 1990 before exit and in 1992 after exit in the graphs - a very dramatic shift in export structure). The Soviet Union was then in an economic crisis as well as in political turmoil, so in spite of friendly relationships we could not count on expanding our exports to the Soviet market to buffer for the loss of a lot of trade with Yu.

Yugoslavia had 23 million inhabitants, of which 2 million (about 10%) were in Slovenia, and the Yu market covered 60% of our exports before exit. This situation is somewhat similar to the UK having 65 million people (13%) out of 515 million in the EEA, with 50% of UK's exports going to the EEA (plus the UK is also very dependent on the EU27 market for its large sector of financial services, which was not the case with Slovenia in relation to the rest of Yugoslavia.

Oh, and like the UK in the EU, Slovenia too was a net donor to the shared Yugoslav development budget (to the tune of 2% of our GDP = more than the UK's net contributions), hence surely we 'saved' huge amounts of money by exiting - except we did not, of course. Actually, our politicians warned us before the referendum that running on our own many things which we used to share at the Yugoslav level will be more expensive for Slovenia. And they also warned us that a decision for exit means a rough ride.

In relation to the fate of the post-Brexit UK, note that Slovenia's main export destinations have always been and still are countries which are geographically close to us (which everyone but the UK understands). And Slovenia never intended to exit the Yugoslav union - we simply had to do it in the end due to Milošević's increasing hostility and aggression under his Greater-Serbia ultra-nationalistic agenda, which included Milošević serially breaching the Yugoslav constitution both politically (e.g. crushing Kosovo's autonomy, several failed attempts to remove Slovenia's government and parliament with a military coup) and economically (e.g. Milošević introduced a blockade against import of Slovenian goods to Serbia thus infringing the Yugoslav single market, Serbia stole a large amount of money from the shared Yugoslav national central bank hence in effect destroying our shared Yugoslav currency). So we lost our great access to the shared Yugoslav market out of necessity, whereas the UK is deliberately turning its back on the EU27. The UK is behaving similar to Serbia did back then.

I should also say that back in 1991 the world was less complicated, so it was somewhat easier to sort out Slovenia's post-exit trade than is the case with Brexit. For example, the WTO was only established in 1995 (although GATT of course existed already in 1991). In addition, Slovenia as a part of Yugoslavia had quite a lot of autonomy, which included the right of Slovenia to sign some trade agreements with other countries. So we relied on these existing trade agreements to re-align our trade. Whereas the UK does not have such own trade agreements to build upon after exit.

I should also say that with our exit Slovenia did not completely destroy the trust of our export partners, but rather gradually gained respect and improved our reputation and reliability. Before we exited, Milošević refused to talk to Slovenia, so we exited with no deal (!). The treaty about dissolution of Yugoslavia (i.e. division of assets and liabilities) was only signed by the successor states in 2001, after Milošević was removed from power in Serbia. Our no-deal exit left, among other things, the division of the shared Yugoslav debts to international creditors unresolved in 1991 at our exit. However, Slovenia did everything in our unilateral legal power to settle our share of the debt with international creditors regardless of Serbia's non-cooperation. Here too the UK with its idiotic threat about not paying its debts to the EU27 is acting like Serbia and contrary to what Slovenia chose to do. This readiness to take on responsibility for liabilities after exit is a part of building post-exit trust of international partners and helps keep and develop friendly relationships.

I think the small economy of Slovenia which needed to re-align its post-exit exports is somewhat similar to those EU27 members whose part, but only a relatively small part, of their whole economy will be affected by Brexit. Like Slovenia and unlike the UK, the EU27 countries have good friends with a large market plus all their other trade deals except the one with the UK remain in place. Slovenia's case shows that it is possible for exporters to re-position their export destination and trade partners in a relatively short time. Where the EU27 companies with links to the UK have had several years to prepare for the changed circumstances. And where Ireland as the most economically exposed country has support from the EU27. It will of course still be a temporary hit due to the Brexit changes also for the EU27, but I expect the dust to settle quite quickly.

Finally, there is also the matter of keeping/restoring friendly political relationships, which are also a basis for economic cooperation. As I explained, unlike the Brexit UK (which has deliberately torn up ALL its trade agreements with ALL countries), Slovenia did not deliberately burn the bridges to any other nation. The most difficult post-exit thing for us was sorting out relationships with Serbia (where Slovenia was not the one that acted with hostility).

In spite of hostility as well as a military attack from Serbia, Slovenia soon extended a hand of friendship to Serbia (after the wars ended and Milošević - who refused to debate anything with Slovenia even before Yu broke up - was out of way. Serbia was more reluctant to accept friendship mostly due to domestic political reason, also because Slovenia kept standing firm behind Kosovo (as we did already when Yu still existed - we strongly protested when Milošević first started crushing Kosovo's autonomy as granted by the Yugoslav constitution in late 1980s).

In early 2010s, Serbia was still behaving with some hostility towards Slovenia due to our support of Kosovo's independence. So the diplomatic relations between our two states were not yet completely normalised because Serbia refused to accept a meeting between our two presidents = heads of state = the highest diplomatic level. We had relationships at all other diplomatic levels, and a lot of economic, cultural, scientific etc. cooperation.

In May 2014, Serbia was hit by devastating floods, and Slovenia was the first country to send aid, including sending our rescue teams and equipment within a few hours after Serbia’s request for help. The people of Slovenia gathered huge amounts of aid. Apart from official Slovenian aid convoys, many private Slovenian trucks were heading to Serbia with aid collected locally. (Bosnia and Herzegovina was badly hit by these floods, so we sent aid there too.)

Our president offered to visit Serbia in May 2014 in the wake of the floods - and the Serbian politicians could not reject the meeting anymore because the public opinion in Serbia was very pro-Slovenian. So finally our two presidents met. In this case, the attitudes of ordinary people and SOLIDARITY trumped the selfish interests of politicians.

In 2015, the Serbian president visited Slovenia - so the bilateral relationships were fully restored also at the highest diplomatic level.

So it took Slovenia and Serbia 23 years to fully restore the bilateral relationships, even with a history of a recent war and major differences of opinion on issues as sensitive for Serbia as Kosovo.

Compare to UK's track record: it took the UK’s head of state = the monarch 100 years (!!!) to visit Ireland - the only country with which the UK shares a land border - after its exit from the UK union!!!

I think that the attitudes in GB will be much more in the way of keeping/restoring friendly relationships with European neighbours than any reservations from the EU27 side. Because just like Serbia GB will remain internally divided for decades due to the self-imposed disaster. And there will be a lot of blaming, and continued denial of reality. Where some hostility will keep flying towards the EU27.

The EU27 people will move on, and there will probably not be much hostility towards the UK, more likely general indifference due to large decrease of UK's importance to the rest of us. And some annoyance because the UK will keep causing some problems - we will still have to sort out Northern Ireland, and in its trade negotiations with the EU27 (if and when they happen after no deal) the UK is bound to keep acting in deranged ways.

The damage to the UK has already been done. With the Brexit blunder, the UK has already gambled away its most valuable asset - long-term stability, reliability and trustworthiness as a partner. No matter what happens next, it will take the UK decades to repair this damage, even if it starts behaving responsibly and honourably tomorrow. In the meantime, businesses and investors (from the EU27 and beyond) will largely avoid the UK (except to engage in asset-stripping).

The UK will remain stuck in a very ugly place for a long time.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Reply
#7
(24-06-19, 12:05 PM)Ajda Slovenia Wrote: Lessons from Slovenia
So I expect the EU27 people to soon largely 'forget' about Brexit. The businesses which used to be linked to the UK market will adopt and re-align (using also the large EU27 market as a buffer plus the 'empty space' in sales to other countries under EU's FTAs left after the UK rips up all these trade agreements plus EU's new trade deals with Canada, Japan and Mercosur). There will be fewer connections with the UK and more with others. Additional customs controls with the UK will become normal.

GB will quickly become quite irrelevant to the EU27. It will not participate in the EU debates anymore. We will keep following news from Poland, Italy, Spain etc. with interest because they are a part of our shared Europe, it matters to the rest of us what is going on there, in many ways. 

What people from the UK haven't realised is that, thanks to their withdrawal, the EU as a matter of fact, will become a more "global" economic power, and with a lot more clout than that little island of theirs will ever be.

Isn't that cool ?
Moonbeam Rider
Reply
#8
(24-06-19, 12:05 PM)Ajda Slovenia Wrote: Lessons from Slovenia


Ghost, I think that something similar to what has happened in Yugoslavia with also happen re Brexit.

I learned from experience that after pulling out of a union, nations drift apart remarkably quickly, even where there used to be close connections. And that nations which made a good decision on the right side of history based on high national unity are able to move on, whereas those on the other side remain stuck in their own destructively divisive hell for decades to come.

So I agree with you that the act of Brexit - and it will be a no deal, it seems - will have a short-term damaging effect for the EU27. But things will soon return to normal and we will move on. And the UK will move out of what we the EU27 people perceive as 'our Europe'.

Remember how before the Brexit tantrum, there used to be meetings of the big three - Germany, France and the UK - before each important decision in the EU. The UK was much more than just 'sitting at the table'. The last meetings of this troika were in the format Merkel-Hollande-Cameron. After the Leave vote, they ended. First the troika became Germany-France-Italy (Merkel-Hollande-Renzi), but then Italy derailed into its own counter-productive tantrum so now we have Merkel-Macron.

The UK has been in effect already sidelined in the EU. This is less noticeable only because there is at present still all this debate about Brexit (and because the UK is still coming to EU meetings). Where in the EU27 Brexit is not all that very interesting anymore; only the Brits debate it constantly. This Thursday and Friday, the EU leaders only spent half an hour on Brexit - in the 27 format, without the UK.

So I expect the EU27 people to soon largely 'forget' about Brexit. The businesses which used to be linked to the UK market will adopt and re-align (using also the large EU27 market as a buffer plus the 'empty space' in sales to other countries under EU's FTAs left after the UK rips up all these trade agreements plus EU's new trade deals with Canada, Japan and Mercosur). There will be fewer connections with the UK and more with others. Additional customs controls with the UK will become normal.

Ireland will feel the disruption most. Here I think that things will be settled with reunification. probably quite quickly. Then united Ireland will be able to move on too, finally free from the UK chains. When Ireland settles to the new normal, Brexit will be regarded as a good thing.

GB will quickly become quite irrelevant to the EU27. It will not participate in the EU debates anymore. We will keep following news from Poland, Italy, Spain etc. with interest because they are a part of our shared Europe, it matters to the rest of us what is going on there, in many ways. But GB will be out of all this. We will only pay some more attention to the UK if it descends into a very nasty fascist regime (which it is on the way of doing) and/or if its special relationship with the US poses new threats to us (likely that the US will install new military bases in GB, on the western flank of the EU superpower). But we will be detached from this, this will not really be 'our' news, a bit like the way we follow developments in Ukraine.

For the UK, Brexit will be a hard encounter with reality. It will keep destructively polluting politics, economy and much more (including divided families and friends) for decades to come.


Lessons of history. In Slovenia, we made a united decision to exit Yugoslavia in 1990 (as a measure of last resort; exit referendum with 95% yes at 93% turnout). We were out in 1991. We even had a ten-day war in effect with Serbia. It was tough for some time, but we never looked back. We remained united. We did the right thing.

With exit from Yugoslavia and in particular because other parts descended into wars, Slovenia largely lost and quite abruptly our shared Yugoslav market on which we used to place 60% of our exports (the Yugoslav internal market was very similar to the EU single market). But we had friends in the EU (i.e. western Europe) and were thus able to re-align our economy - we exported less than we used to to exYu, but more than we used to to the EU.

These graphs show how Slovenia re-oriented its exports after exit from the Yugoslav union and loss of a large part of exports to the Yugoslav market due to this disruption, and quite quickly so:

[Image: attachment.php?aid=234]
Image URL: http://debateuncensored.co.uk/attachment.php?aid=234

The top graph shows Slovenia's exports to our top five destinations.

In the bottom graph, I included the following countries in the three EU groups regardless if they were already in the EU in the respective year shown on the graph (for example, Hungary only joined the EU in 2004, but it is included already in the column for 1990 in the 'New EU-11' group):
  • Old EU-15: Germany, Italy, Austria, France
  • Old EU-15: other - Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom
  • New EU-11 - Bulgaria, Czechia, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia
Yugoslavia was not behind the Iron Curtain and it had good political and economic relationships in the Cold-War environment both with the west and the east. Before exit, Slovenia's main export destination was to other parts of our shared Yugoslav market (some 60% of our exports), whereas our five most important foreign export partners were Germany, Italy France and Austria (together about 25%) and the Soviet Union (6%). 

At the time of our exit, Yugoslavia was sinking into an economic crisis, but western Europe was in quite a good economic condition as well as supportive of newly independent Slovenia, so due to these friendly relationships and relatively small size of Slovenia and hence a small amount of our 'additional' exports compared to the large western-European market western Europe was able to absorb our re-directed exports (compare our export destinations in 1990 before exit and in 1992 after exit in the graphs - a very dramatic shift in export structure). The Soviet Union was then in an economic crisis as well as in political turmoil, so in spite of friendly relationships we could not count on expanding our exports to the Soviet market to buffer for the loss of a lot of trade with Yu.

Yugoslavia had 23 million inhabitants, of which 2 million (about 10%) were in Slovenia, and the Yu market covered 60% of our exports before exit. This situation is somewhat similar to the UK having 65 million people (13%) out of 515 million in the EEA, with 50% of UK's exports going to the EEA (plus the UK is also very dependent on the EU27 market for its large sector of financial services, which was not the case with Slovenia in relation to the rest of Yugoslavia.

Oh, and like the UK in the EU, Slovenia too was a net donor to the shared Yugoslav development budget (to the tune of 2% of our GDP = more than the UK's net contributions), hence surely we 'saved' huge amounts of money by exiting - except we did not, of course. Actually, our politicians warned us before the referendum that running on our own many things which we used to share at the Yugoslav level will be more expensive for Slovenia. And they also warned us that a decision for exit means a rough ride.

In relation to the fate of the post-Brexit UK, note that Slovenia's main export destinations have always been and still are countries which are geographically close to us (which everyone but the UK understands). And Slovenia never intended to exit the Yugoslav union - we simply had to do it in the end due to Milošević's increasing hostility and aggression under his Greater-Serbia ultra-nationalistic agenda, which included Milošević serially breaching the Yugoslav constitution both politically (e.g. crushing Kosovo's autonomy, several failed attempts to remove Slovenia's government and parliament with a military coup) and economically (e.g. Milošević introduced a blockade against import of Slovenian goods to Serbia thus infringing the Yugoslav single market, Serbia stole a large amount of money from the shared Yugoslav national central bank hence in effect destroying our shared Yugoslav currency). So we lost our great access to the shared Yugoslav market out of necessity, whereas the UK is deliberately turning its back on the EU27. The UK is behaving similar to Serbia did back then.

I should also say that back in 1991 the world was less complicated, so it was somewhat easier to sort out Slovenia's post-exit trade than is the case with Brexit. For example, the WTO was only established in 1995 (although GATT of course existed already in 1991). In addition, Slovenia as a part of Yugoslavia had quite a lot of autonomy, which included the right of Slovenia to sign some trade agreements with other countries. So we relied on these existing trade agreements to re-align our trade. Whereas the UK does not have such own trade agreements to build upon after exit.

I should also say that with our exit Slovenia did not completely destroy the trust of our export partners, but rather gradually gained respect and improved our reputation and reliability. Before we exited, Milošević refused to talk to Slovenia, so we exited with no deal (!). The treaty about dissolution of Yugoslavia (i.e. division of assets and liabilities) was only signed by the successor states in 2001, after Milošević was removed from power in Serbia. Our no-deal exit left, among other things, the division of the shared Yugoslav debts to international creditors unresolved in 1991 at our exit. However, Slovenia did everything in our unilateral legal power to settle our share of the debt with international creditors regardless of Serbia's non-cooperation. Here too the UK with its idiotic threat about not paying its debts to the EU27 is acting like Serbia and contrary to what Slovenia chose to do. This readiness to take on responsibility for liabilities after exit is a part of building post-exit trust of international partners and helps keep and develop friendly relationships.

I think the small economy of Slovenia which needed to re-align its post-exit exports is somewhat similar to those EU27 members whose part, but only a relatively small part, of their whole economy will be affected by Brexit. Like Slovenia and unlike the UK, the EU27 countries have good friends with a large market plus all their other trade deals except the one with the UK remain in place. Slovenia's case shows that it is possible for exporters to re-position their export destination and trade partners in a relatively short time. Where the EU27 companies with links to the UK have had several years to prepare for the changed circumstances. And where Ireland as the most economically exposed country has support from the EU27. It will of course still be a temporary hit due to the Brexit changes also for the EU27, but I expect the dust to settle quite quickly.

Finally, there is also the matter of keeping/restoring friendly political relationships, which are also a basis for economic cooperation. As I explained, unlike the Brexit UK (which has deliberately torn up ALL its trade agreements with ALL countries), Slovenia did not deliberately burn the bridges to any other nation. The most difficult post-exit thing for us was sorting out relationships with Serbia (where Slovenia was not the one that acted with hostility).

In spite of hostility as well as a military attack from Serbia, Slovenia soon extended a hand of friendship to Serbia (after the wars ended and Milošević - who refused to debate anything with Slovenia even before Yu broke up - was out of way. Serbia was more reluctant to accept friendship mostly due to domestic political reason, also because Slovenia kept standing firm behind Kosovo (as we did already when Yu still existed - we strongly protested when Milošević first started crushing Kosovo's autonomy as granted by the Yugoslav constitution in late 1980s).

In early 2010s, Serbia was still behaving with some hostility towards Slovenia due to our support of Kosovo's independence. So the diplomatic relations between our two states were not yet completely normalised because Serbia refused to accept a meeting between our two presidents = heads of state = the highest diplomatic level. We had relationships at all other diplomatic levels, and a lot of economic, cultural, scientific etc. cooperation.

In May 2014, Serbia was hit by devastating floods, and Slovenia was the first country to send aid, including sending our rescue teams and equipment within a few hours after Serbia’s request for help. The people of Slovenia gathered huge amounts of aid. Apart from official Slovenian aid convoys, many private Slovenian trucks were heading to Serbia with aid collected locally. (Bosnia and Herzegovina was badly hit by these floods, so we sent aid there too.)

Our president offered to visit Serbia in May 2014 in the wake of the floods - and the Serbian politicians could not reject the meeting anymore because the public opinion in Serbia was very pro-Slovenian. So finally our two presidents met. In this case, the attitudes of ordinary people and SOLIDARITY trumped the selfish interests of politicians.

In 2015, the Serbian president visited Slovenia - so the bilateral relationships were fully restored also at the highest diplomatic level.

So it took Slovenia and Serbia 23 years to fully restore the bilateral relationships, even with a history of a recent war and major differences of opinion on issues as sensitive for Serbia as Kosovo.

Compare to UK's track record: it took the UK’s head of state = the monarch 100 years (!!!) to visit Ireland - the only country with which the UK shares a land border - after its exit from the UK union!!!

I think that the attitudes in GB will be much more in the way of keeping/restoring friendly relationships with European neighbours than any reservations from the EU27 side. Because just like Serbia GB will remain internally divided for decades due to the self-imposed disaster. And there will be a lot of blaming, and continued denial of reality. Where some hostility will keep flying towards the EU27.

The EU27 people will move on, and there will probably not be much hostility towards the UK, more likely general indifference due to large decrease of UK's importance to the rest of us. And some annoyance because the UK will keep causing some problems - we will still have to sort out Northern Ireland, and in its trade negotiations with the EU27 (if and when they happen after no deal) the UK is bound to keep acting in deranged ways.

The damage to the UK has already been done. With the Brexit blunder, the UK has already gambled away its most valuable asset - long-term stability, reliability and trustworthiness as a partner. No matter what happens next, it will take the UK decades to repair this damage, even if it starts behaving responsibly and honourably tomorrow. In the meantime, businesses and investors (from the EU27 and beyond) will largely avoid the UK (except to engage in asset-stripping).

The UK will remain stuck in a very ugly place for a long time.

Thank you so much for telling us how the split was managed on the Slovenian side. Very interesting account. While I was reading you, I wondered how close Slovenians feel toward their former partners in Yu. The flood episode gave me the answer. 

I am very happy your country joined. We didn't do half as well before.  Smile
Reply
#9
(24-06-19, 06:02 PM)PierrotLunaire Wrote: What people from the UK haven't realised is that, thanks to their withdrawal, the EU as a matter of fact, will become a more "global" economic power, and with a lot more clout than that little island of theirs will ever be.

Isn't that cool ?

Probably some have realised that.  Some are still living in a dream - it will soon crash down.  They will keep their links with US and some despot regimes in the Persian Gulf. It will be pitiful to see, because the UK's relationship when the US was more healthy when the UK was in the EU.  Now it will become just like a poodle, really.

Yes, Europe will be much more "global" than "Global Britain".  Such a sad little slogan. 

Apologies, I don't find this cool, but terrible. I cannot gloat over this European tragedy. In fact I like the Brits very much as people, though not their politicians, media, so forth.
Reply
#10
Here they go again; 

MLex reports on new Grayling ferries to outflank the Dover/Calais route once again, plus medecines stockpiling.

Remember, they are systematically and openly choosing to do this, end frictionless free trade, introduce tariffs, lose jobs, falling foreign investment, no security of supplies, no integrated VAT,....They will blame the neighbours, They did it to us.

They will need ultra-competent government from November onwards to stand any chance at all.  Instead they will have a cabinet made up of clowns and journalists and probably, a government with no majority in HoC. 

I read also that the Brexit Party wants a purge, a clean out of all the top (highly paid) civil servants to replace them with top politicians, that is to say Brexit Party politicians.

Not gloating, just identifying how the great scheme is evolving.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)