The boundaries of nearly every European country have
changed since 1900. The exceptions are places like Spain and Portugal and the Netherlands.
Everyone else has either lost or gained territory or come into existence. But
all of these boundaries are fixed now and irrevocable. This is the reason why Europe
is united in support of Ukraine as it fights to maintain its territorial integrity
and to stop Russia changing its international borders.
The only exception to the rule in Europe that borders
are unchangeable is the United Kingdom. Nowhere else in Europe is a sovereign
state threatened on two fronts one internal, the other external.
It is really our own fault. Ever since the Kingdom of
Great Britain was formed and then later the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, we have maintained the idea that this state was made up of places
called countries. No one else in Europe thinks in this way, though they too are
most commonly made up of formerly independent kingdoms and states.
It is for this reason that the UK alone thinks that
each “country” has the right to choose whether it remains or leaves democratically.
No one thinks that Sicily or Saxony or Silesia has this right.
This is why the UK was willing to make peace in
Northern Ireland by means of the Belfast Agreement. The response to decades of
terrorism by the IRA with the goal of bringing about a united Ireland was to
grant the IRA the right to that goal if it could win support in both Northern
Ireland and in the Republic of Ireland. No one else in Europe would have
responded to terrorism in this way. The Spanish did not for instance allow the
Basques to achieve what they could not achieve by terror by means of votes.
Britain’s attitude to Northern Ireland has from the
beginning been to a place apart. The British Government was willing on a number
of occasions in the past 100 years to negotiate it away. The Northern Ireland
Protocol was simply the latest of these. But the root is the same. The British
Government and most voters in Britain have not viewed Northern Ireland as
permanent British territory.
While we were willing to send troops to Northern
Ireland, it’s position within the UK was always contingent. The argument was that
we defended Northern Ireland only because the majority who lived there wished
to remain British. Implicit was the idea that we didn’t really want Northern Ireland.
It’s just those pesky Ulster Protestants made up a majority and so we were
stuck with them. If only they were more like Terry Wogan or Val Doonican we could
be shot of the place.
It is this context that gave rise to the Northern
Irish Protocol. It is unimaginable that any other part of the UK would have
been treated in this way. No other European country would have allowed such an
arrangement.
The problem began with Theresa May accepting that the
Belfast Agreement meant there could be no border infrastructure between Ireland
and Northern Ireland. But there is nothing in the agreement about borders and
the interpretation that the border must be invisible was an Irish nationalist one.
However, once the British Government accepted that the
Irish border must be invisible it made the Protocol inevitable if Britain wanted
to leave the EU with a deal. Faced with stalemate and the very real prospect that
the Remainer rearguard would succeed, Boris Johnson agreed to the Protocol,
because the only alternative was not to leave at all. He too like his hero
Winston Churchill viewed Northern Ireland as expendable. Millions of Brexiteers
did too as we voted for Boris and Brexit.
The European Union has shown itself to be sympathetic
to both Irish nationalism and Scottish nationalism. There is little prospect of
a united Ireland anytime soon, but there is no question that the Protocol is
part of a long-term strategy to weaken the bonds between Northern Ireland and
Britain and to create a united Irish economy as a precursor to a single state.
But there are any number of border disputes where
identities stretch across borders. The EU does not allow German speakers in
South Tyrol to agitate for a border poll and reunification with Austria, nor
does it think that Russian speaking parts of Ukraine ought to have the right to
join Russia by means of a poll. There is not one border in mainland Europe that
the EU wishes to change democratically, but there are two in the British Isles
if not three if we count Wales.
The problem in the end is due to us. It is because we
do not view the United Kingdom like the United States. If Alaskans wished to rejoin
Russia, the United States would fight to maintain its territorial integrity,
but we won’t.
While the British Government will keep saying No to
Sturgeon, we won’t say No forever if support for independence remains high enough.
If eventually the demographics of Northern Ireland changes enough and support for
a united Ireland becomes the majority, we will do our best to bring about their
desire. We may even fund it.
Perhaps it is better that we allow democracy to change
borders rather than war, but if that were the case why didn’t we argue for
legitimate plebiscites in Ukraine and why don’t we argue for them everywhere
else in the world where there are peoples who would prefer to form their own
state or to join someone else’s? The reason is that this would certainly cause chaos
and would make most states impossible to administer. It would also make the
European Union collapse about as quickly as Yugoslavia did.
The United Kingdom is the most unstable state in Europe.
We are held together by a minimum of sentiment. Few English people would care
if Northern Ireland left and not many more would care if Scotland left. What really
holds us together is subsidy. Neither Northern Ireland nor Scotland can afford to
leave the UK without suffering a major drop in living standards. Someone would
have to make up the difference. That someone could be either Dublin in the case
of Northern Ireland or Brussels in the case of Scotland but it’s hard to see
how either would be willing or able to subsidise to the extent that London does
at present.
Ditching the Protocol is necessary because it turns
Northern Ireland into a drain that is linked to Ireland’s gutter. If it is to inevitably
go, then we are merely pouring money down that drain. If on the other hand, we
are serious about protecting our territorial integrity then we need to change
our attitude both towards Northern Ireland and Scotland.
Is it better that the UK exists or is it better than we
revert to the situation in the Middle Ages with a large England and the Celtic
fringes separate and squabbling with their richer neighbour? It is unlikely
that this arrangement would have been as successful for any of the four parts
including England. There is a reason we united, just as there is a reason that
France and Germany are no longer made up of squabbling kingdoms.
Neither the United States nor any member state of the
EU would allow something like the Northern Ireland Protocol to exist within
their own country. It is mere hypocrisy that they demand it exist within ours. They
cannot expect the UK to remain a valued and necessary ally while doing all they
can to encourage the UK to cease to be.
Ireland cannot describe itself as a partner, let alone
a friend while it aims to annex our territory. There is enough instability in
Easter Europe without adding to it here.
