The Wall Street Journal opined earlier this week that, in the words of the piece’s subheadline,
A no-deal crash out of the EU may be the best outcome now.
The rest of the thing was a string of rationalizations of why this is true, but the heart of the matter is that subhead.
In fact, though, a no-deal departure always has been the best outcome.
A priori because that’s what the Brits voted for in their referendum—they wanted their sovereignty and control of their own borders back. Full stop.
That’s British Minister Theresa May’s plea to Brussels.
…the decisions that the European Union makes over the next few days will have a big impact on the outcome of the [parliamentary] vote. … [L]et’s not hold back. Let’s do what is necessary for MPs to back the deal on Tuesday.
The EU functionaries have been playing you for a fool for a year and a half. This is confirmed by the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier:
EU commits to give UK the option to exit the Single Customs Territory unilaterally….
The United Nation’s International Court of Justice, in a non-binding “advisory” opinion, says Great Britain should give up its territory in the Indian Ocean.
the United Kingdom carved up Mauritius illegally when it ended its colonization of the Indian Ocean islands and must “bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible.”
Sadly, this is typical of the knee-jerk anti-West bias that has overrun the UN over the last several decades. It is, also, another useless mouthing of that biased body that is better left ignored. Great Britain should continue quietly going about its business in its territory—wherever that territory might lie.
European Council President Donald Tusk, whose contempt for the Brits and their move to free themselves of the European Union is well known, now is insisting that Great Britain just willy-nilly delay its exit past the current legally mandated 29 March date.
European Council President Donald Tusk said that keeping the current divorce date at March 29 would be risky, as a revised deal is not in sight and businesses are worried about a chaotic exit under a “no deal” situation.
…for Great Britain to go out from the European Union.
Donald Tusk, European Council President:
I’ve been wondering what that special place in hell looks like for those who promoted Brexit without even a sketch of a plan of how to carry it out safely.
To which Guy Verhofstadt, European Parliament representative for Brexit negotiations, added
I doubt Lucifer would welcome them, as after what they did to Britain, they would even manage to divide Hell.
Tusk also said
“our most important task is to prevent a No Deal scenario”, Mr Tusk stressed.
But he said that Brussels would make “no new offer” to the UK….
More European nations have recognized the Guaidó government as the legitimate government of Venezuela following the passing of those nations’ Sunday deadline for Maduro to schedule free elections with no action by Maduro (though left unaddressed is the conundrum of how Maduro could schedule anything if he’s not the legitimate head of government).
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin demurs.
…domestic issues should be solved by Venezuela and its people. “Attempts to legitimize usurped power” constitute[] “interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs….”
Last Tuesday, the British Parliament voted to send Prime Minister Theresa May back to Brussels to renegotiate the status of Great Britain’s Northern Ireland border with the Republic of Ireland, which is part of the Brit-EU exit agreement that the Parliament had earlier rejected. The same day, the Parliament also rejected an attempt by Labour to delay by nine months the actual departure of Great Britain from the EU, leaving the date set at 29 March.
European Council President Donald Tusk said through his spokesman
The backstop is part of the Withdrawal Agreement, and the Withdrawal Agreement is not open for renegotiation.
Ambassador John Bolton, at Monday’s noon press conference, had two brief notes at the top of his 8.5×11 yellow note pad, written in clear, black lettering. One referenced Afghanistan, and the other said, “5,000 troops to Colombia.”
Naturally, the NLMSM jumped all over that second one and is wondering a) how could Bolton be so careless as to let the press see and photograph such a note, and b) whatever could it mean?
Even in the midst of the US government’s partial shutdown imbroglio and Great Britain’s Brexit fiasco, the two found time and energy to conduct joint operations training in the South China Sea.
Even though this only involved two ships—the Arleigh-Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS McCampbell and Royal Navy Type 23 frigate HMS Argyll—it’s a critical beginning (not really a resumption; the last such joint exercise was eight years ago).
We need to expand on this, though. We need, also, to run joint flotilla- and fleet-level exercises in the South China Sea, and then we need to involve Vietnam, the Republic of Korea, and Japan in this sort of joint exercise. In their aggregate, they need to occur a couple of times per year—and they need to include island assault exercises.
Some Congressmen are working on bills that, in their aggregate, would bar sales of critical computer components to the People’s Republic of China’s communications companies Huawei, ZTE, and other PRC companies caught violating our export laws or sanctions on those companies or companies with which these do business.
The PRC is upset.
Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said it was all “hysteria,” and
I believe the action of these few representatives are an expression of extreme arrogance and an extreme lack of self-confidence[.]
The PRC’s insults and hysterical response, whether individual or taken together, are sufficient evidence that we’re on the right track.