LONDON: The British government set out its plans for a one-year backstop plan for the Irish border on Thursday, finding an agreement on only part of what has become Prime Minister Theresa May’s biggest Brexit stumbling block — customs.
But by setting a date on the plan for the standby arrangement to ensure no return of a hard border between Northern Ireland and EU member Ireland, May looked to have put settling a row with her Brexit minister ahead of securing agreement with the EU, which has already rejected a time limit.
The publication of the proposal comes after days of rows in May’s cabinet of top ministers which have all but stalled talks, brought warnings from EU officials and weighed on sterling, with investors uneasy over the lack of progress.
Unveiling its proposal for a “temporary customs arrangement,” the government also said the backstop — which would be put in place only if there were a delay in implementing any Brexit deal — would also see the whole United Kingdom rather than just Northern Ireland remaining aligned with EU rules.
“The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited,” the document, which was also sent to Brussels, said.
“The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.”
The one-year backstop plan would come after an almost two-year transition period following Britain’s departure from the EU in March next year.
This was not the government’s preferred option, the proposal said, but if it was triggered, Britain should have the right to negotiate, sign and ratify trade deals with other parts of world.
The document looks to be a compromise to keep Brexit minister David Davis on board, after he raised concerns that an earlier proposal had no end date and could see Britain tied to the EU’s customs union indefinitely.
A pro-European member of the ruling Conservative Party dismissed the move.
“This doesn’t change anything. It doesn’t go far enough. This is more wishful thinking from the government. There is no way they are going to get a deal in time,” the Conservative member said on condition of anonymity.
The pre-publication row was yet another sign of the difficulty a weakened prime minister is having in driving the negotiations with the EU. She is struggling to unite not only her ministers but her Conservative Party over a strategy that will define Britain’s trading relationships for years to come.
Britain proposes one-year Brexit backstop plan to EU
Britain proposes one-year Brexit backstop plan to EU
Trump insists he struck Iran on his own terms
- “We are now a nation divided between those who want to fight wars for Israel and those who just want peace and to be able to afford their bills and health insurance,” Marjorie Taylor Greene posted on X.
- Rubio himself doubled down on Tuesday after meeting with US House and Senate members, while insisting that “No, I told you this had to happen anyway”
WASHINGTON, United States: President Donald Trump and his team scrambled Tuesday to reclaim the narrative on why he decided to attack Iran, after his top diplomat suggested the US struck only after learning of an imminent Israeli strike.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio alarmed Democrats — who say only Congress can declare war — as well as many of Trump’s MAGA supporters on Monday when he said: “We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action.”
“We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t pre-emptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties,” Rubio told reporters.
Administration officials quickly backpedalled, insisting Trump authorized the strikes because Tehran was not seriously negotiating an accord on limiting its nuclear ambitions, and the United States needed to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities.
“No, Marco Rubio Didn’t Claim That Israel Dragged Trump into War with Iran,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted Tuesday on X.
At an Oval Office meeting later with Germany’s chancellor, Trump went further, saying that “Based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they (Iran) were going to attack first. And I didn’t want that to happen.”
“So, if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”
- Had to happen? -
Rubio himself doubled down on Tuesday after meeting with US House and Senate members, while insisting that “No, I told you this had to happen anyway.”
“The president made a decision. The decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide... behind this ability to conduct an attack.”
Critics seized on the muddied messaging to accuse Trump of precipitating the country into a war without a clear rationale, without informing Congress — and without a clear idea of how it might end.
They noted that just two weeks ago, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pressed Trump again in Washington to take a hard line, in their seventh meeting since Trump’s return to power last year.
Some Republican allies rallied behind the president, with Senator Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, insisting that “No one pushes or drags Donald Trump anywhere.”
“He acts in the vital national security interest of the United States,” Cotton told the “Fox & Friends” morning show.
But as crucial US midterm elections approach that could see Republicans lose their congressional majority, Trump risks shedding supporters who had welcomed his pledge to end foreign military interventions.
“We are now a nation divided between those who want to fight wars for Israel and those who just want peace and to be able to afford their bills and health insurance,” Marjorie Taylor Greene, a top former Trump ally and a major figure in the populist and isolationist hard right, posted on X.
