On the Record | Brexit Retreat Opens Door for BoJo

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Brexit Retreat Opens Door for BoJo’:

Prime Minister Theresa May’s retreat on Brexit is best seen as an opening for her former foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, who is the last contender for prime minister to have seen the European Union question clearly from the start. What Mrs. May is doing, after all, is what Mr. Johnson proposed, once it became so clear to so many that she had been snookered in Brussels.

What Mrs. May did in the Commons this afternoon was to announce that she was postponing Tuesday’s vote on the Government’s Withdrawal Agreement bill with the European Union. “While there is broad support for many of the key aspects of the deal,” Mrs. May confessed, “there remains widespread and deep concern.”

The Prime Minister made it clear she comprehends that had she proceeded, “the deal would be rejected by a significant margin.” In the context, it is a breath-taking admission by a leader who’d seemed almost willfully blind on the point. Now, she said, the Government “will therefore defer the vote scheduled for tomorrow and not proceed to divide the House at this time.”

It is easy to see why Mrs. May is vote-shy. Just last week, after all, the government lost three votes. Two were in relation to the legal advice the government had received on the agreement. Parliament had asked for the advice in November but, when only a summary was provided, the Commons demanded the full report.

Mrs. May lost one vote to postpone this vote, then lost the vote itself — a vote that many say was signaling that the Government was in contempt of Parliament.

The third vote is even more momentous. The Commons won a vote to set out its own Brexit “Plan B” if the Government cannot get its plan through Parliament. This could be another Withdrawal Agreement or another referendum vote — even to shelve Brexit unilaterally, as the European Court of Justice announced today in answer to a query from the Scottish legislature and for hopeful Remainers.

Read more . . .

Remarks are welcome on DMI’s Facebook page.

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Will Thatcher’s Ghost Haunt Mrs. May?

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Will Thatcher’s Ghost Haunt Mrs. May?’:

What an irony that Prime Minister Theresa May’s crisis over Brexit is coming to a head on the 28^th anniversary, to-day, of the fall from power of Margaret Thatcher. If only the Iron Lady were alive today.

She was challenged for leadership in November 1990 by fellow Tory Michael Heseltine. His perfidy fell short of toppling her outright, but Mrs. Thatcher failed to secure the margin needed to survive the vote. So a further vote of confidence became necessary. After consulting colleagues, Mrs. Thatcher concluded she lacked the support to see off the second round.

What was Mrs. Thatcher’s political sin that turned her caucus against her? Obstinacy in the face of growing resistance to a poll tax that levied rates regardless of one’s ability to pay was the catalyst for her removal, say opponents, who did not lack for self-justification.

Read more . . .

Remarks are welcome on DMI’s Facebook page.

__________

Addendum. Though I remain sympathetic to Edmund Burke’s sentiments expressed to the electors of Bristol in 1774 — ‘that a politician betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices [his judgement] to your opinion’ — Public Choice Theory has heightened my suspicions of politicians and government officials who claim to have skills and knowledge of which the general public is deprived.

As Adam Smith observed in The Wealth of Nations, no one person enjoys the breadth and depth of knowledge required to direct the whole economic programme of a nation (cited in my New York Sun wire). F.A. Hayek explored this theme in his Nobel Prize for Economics acceptance speech in 1974, ‘The Pretense of Knowledge’.

Public Choice also questions the conventional wisdom that private individuals are self-interested, whereas public officials are directed by the best interests of the commonweal. Does this mean that public actors never consider their own interests when making political decisions?

Finally, with respect to Brexit and Britain’s efforts to leave the trade apparatus imposed by the European Union: economics teaches that the best option available, based on the division of labour and the law of comparative advantage, is free trade. While there is much discussion of Britain securing free trade deals with the global community, it is far more likely that ‘managed’ trade agreements will be secured — still a better option than what the EU presents. Nevertheless, it suggests that the UK Government, in a paternalistic fashion, does not trust its business community to strike out on its own, unsupervised. But as Ludwig von Mises wrote, ‘If one rejects laissez faire on account of man’s fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reasons also reject every kind of government action.’

Thus it is with Theresa May’s draft Withdrawal Agreement with the EU. The document not only insinuates that Government officials must protect British citizens from their own worst instincts for freedom, but it abrogates the 2016 referendum that voted to restore lost liberties and UK sovereignty.

Does anybody now question why Britons feel more secure in their own opinions over the wisdom of their elected representatives? Those same Government officials who run roughshod over the rule of law and trample in the mud the traditions of British parliamentary democracy?

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Is Boris Johnson the Leader for Brexit’s Darkest Hour?

Please see my latest wire for The American Spectator, ‘Is Boris Johnson the Leader for Brexit’s Darkest Hour?’:

A British politician who lived by his pen, enjoyed a chequered reputation attracting supporters and detractors, warned of an existential threat to his nation, while boasting American antecedents? Many will answer “Winston Churchill.” Full marks, though, for taking a contemporary turn and replying “Boris Johnson.”

Churchill’s dogged leadership during World War II and foresight in its aftermath, when, at Fulton, Missouri, he warned of the Soviet “iron curtain” descending over Eastern Europe, won him heroic status in America — not to mention the rare privilege of becoming an honorary U.S. citizen. His mother was Brooklyn heiress Jennie Jerome (Mr. Johnson, meanwhile, was born in New York City).

Movie audiences of Darkest Hour glimpsed Churchill’s early days as Prime Minister, as he struggled to rescue an army surrounded at Dunkirk and to convince fellow Conservatives and a hostile Commons to fight against German aggression instead of submitting to German terms. Britons would “fight on the beaches… never surrender,” and hold out for, “in one word, victory.”

Britain’s battle today is bureaucratic, but no less existential.

Read more . . .

Remarks are welcome on DMI’s Facebook page.

__________

My thanks to editor Wlady Pleszczynski of The American Spectator.

On the Record | Britons Await the Promise of Brexit

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Britons Await the Promise of Brexit’:

Prime Minister Theresa May’s loss of another Brexit minister, Dominic Raab, invites a paraphrase of Oscar Wilde, “to lose one Brexit minister, Prime Minister, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.”

Carelessness does not even begin to encompass Mrs. May’s ineptness since the June 2016 referendum vote in favor of exiting the European Union and striking out once more as a sovereign country in command of its laws, borders, public purse, and trade policies.

Mr. Raab’s reasons for his departure — he could not ‘in good conscience” support Mrs. May’s draft withdrawal agreement from the European Union — echo the Brexiteer consensus: Dissatisfaction with the proposed resolution of the so-called “Irish backstop.”

Government attempts to address the Irish question, allowing Brussels to maintain the integrity of its single market and customs union, have resulted in proposals that leave parts of the UK — that is, Northern Ireland — under EU jurisdiction.

Adding insult to injury, the draft framework forbids the UK from unilaterally curtailing the backstop, while giving significant authority to the EU and the Irish government. In his resignation letter, Mr. Raab said the draft “presents a very real threat to the integrity of the United Kingdom.”

Mr. Rabb said he could not support “an indefinite backstop arrangement, where the EU holds a veto over our ability to exit.” That echoes in spirit Boris Johnson’s complaint that it would reduce Great Britain to a “vassal state.”

Read more . . .

Remarks are welcome on DMI’s Facebook page.

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | ‘No Deal’ means ‘No Problem’ as Brexit nears

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘“No Deal” means “No Problem” as Brexit nears’:

“Brexit deal hopes dashed.” So reads the headline in the London Sun, after Brexit minister Dominic Raab flies to Brussels for emergency talks with EU officials. Disappointment springs from the fount of so much angst for the United Kingdom — Ireland. Is the promise of Brexit coming undone?

Much ado about nothing, methinks.

Don’t get me wrong. Britain’s successful uncoupling from the European Union is very much a concern. It’s just that this latest crisis isn’t really much of a crisis. It’s a manufactured crisis.

The question of an “Irish backstop” is only one more obstacle thrown up to wrong-foot the British prime minister. And to the EU’s satisfaction, Theresa May has proven herself less than adept on the Brexit file.

Brinkmanship diplomacy, this isn’t.

Read more . . .

Remarks are welcome on DMI’s Facebook page.

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | A ‘Dream Team’ for the Tories Comes into Focus

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘A “Dream Team” for the Tories Comes into Focus’:

One thing provided by the autumn party conference of the ruling Conservatives in Britain is a glimpse of the emerging dream team. It pairs with the boisterous polemicist Boris Johnson the calm, impassioned Jacob Rees-Mogg, who delivered a Brexit “primer” that will set a kind of standard in the seasons ahead.

It illuminates why he is so popular among party activists. “BoJo,” famed journalist, former London mayor, and ex-foreign secretary, along with investment banker “The Mogg,” have the potential to become the next Thomas Jefferson and Albert Gallatin, Calvin Coolidge and Andrew Mellon. Theirs is a vision for Britain as an open, free-market, growing independent country, hewing to limited government and fiscal prudence, and leading its vast commonwealth loyalists in the liberal tradition.

“Making a success of Brexit” was the theme of this fringe gathering, to fulfil the promise of the 2016 referendum to leave the European Union that became, in Mr. Johnson words, Britain’s “Independence Day.” And for Mr. Rees-Mogg, “just the vote was itself a success.”

For him, it was a vote to leave Brussels and its fixation on regulations and tariffs, to cast off Remainers’ insidious progress toward “managing decline,” and to resurrect Margaret Thatcher’s faith that “a mature economy can revive and reform and succeed by its own efforts and endeavors.”

Read more . . .

Remarks are welcome on DMI’s Facebook page.

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

__________

And, from Nova Scotia, may I wish you a peaceful Thanksgiving week-end!

On the Record | Brexit Backtrack Hints of Treason, Johnson Warns

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Brexit Backtrack Hints of Treason, Johnson Warns’:

The most astonishing moment of Boris Johnson’s speech on the fringe of the British Conservative Party conference was his thinly-veiled suggestion that the compromise plan on Brexit backed by Prime Minister Theresa May is flirting with treason.

The former foreign minister, laying the ground for his own bid for leadership, stopped short Tuesday of directly accusing Mrs. May & Co of having committed treason. He didn’t even use the T-word. He skated, though, close to the line.

Were Britain to leave the European Union and relinquish membership rights, yet remain subject to evolving trade regulations as part of the Chequers compromise, Mr. Johnson said, its authors would “risk prosecution under the 14^th century statute of præmunire, which says that no foreign court or government shall have jurisdiction in this country.”

That was a nod to a series of laws designed to block papal authority, bowing to which was seen as an act of treason. The laws of præmunire are now defunct. The point, though, put into the sharpest relief yet the rift among the governing Conservatives.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Brexit: A Hostage to Fortune

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Brexit: A Hostage to Fortune’:

“Insanity,” according to conventional wisdom, “is doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different outcome.” Britain’s prime minister is coming dangerously close to fulfilling this charge. The Times of London reports “contingency planning for a snap election” this autumn, to save Theresa May’s job and her Brexit proposal after being effectively snubbed by Brussels.

Mrs. May continues to extol the benefits of Chequers, her party’s program for future relations with the European Union once Britain exits. She’s persisting even though both Leavers and Remainers trashed its half-in/half-out provisions. Only when her EU counterparts reiterated that its provisions were unacceptable, has she contemplated — perhaps — a Chequers redo.

Rumors are swirling around Downing Street that, in the face of factions at home and recalcitrance abroad, the Prime Minister will appeal to voters to strengthen her mandate. It would be a “Hail Mary pass” to unite Tories behind her Brexit strategy and convince Brussels that Britain means business.

Haven’t we seen this brainstorm before?

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | When Britain Stood Up at Bruges

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘When Britain Stood Up at Bruges’:

“The shot heard round the world.” That’s how history remembers that fateful day in April 1775 when Massachusetts militia engaged British regulars on the fields of Lexington and Concord in defence of their liberties. Brexiteers recall their own summons to freedom, 30 years ago today: Margaret Thatcher’s Bruges speech.

Mrs. Thatcher’s critique of the European Union’s appetite for power made its mark and sparked a movement. Bruges gave birth to Brexit; its apotheosis, the June 2016 referendum vote whether to regain lost sovereignty or to stay within the EU. “Only” the hard work of negotiating Britain’s secession remains.

So much of the Bruges speech informs the rise of Brexit. And with Britain’s withdrawal from Brussels merely six months away, Mrs. Thatcher’s vision can lay the framework for Britain post-Brexit: “the willing and active cooperation between independent sovereign states.”

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Ghosts of the Thatcher Coup

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Ghosts of the Thatcher Coup’:

As rumors swirl about challenges to Theresa May, the British press has been dogging a politician with first-hand experience in the art of ousting a sitting prime minister — Michael Heseltine. He infamously defenestrated Margaret Thatcher. Will it be déjà vu all over again, this time with Boris Johnson as the leading conspirator against the lady in power?

Lord Heseltine challenged Mrs. Thatcher in November 1990, arguing that the Iron Lady was no longer “fit for purpose.” There’s some irony that the row was ignited by the desire of some of the Conservatives to join the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. Mrs. Thatcher objected. I wouldn’t want to press the point too far, but that beef was an early seed of Brexit.

While successful in the overthrow, Lord Heseltine himself failed to emerge in the top spot. Those who “do in” their leaders rarely do. Yet he remains active in Conservative politics, both as a life peer and a prominent opponent of Brexit. He’s making the most of the efforts by the press to cast him as a wise man.

Asked about the career prospects of Mrs. May’s potential challenger, Lord Heseltine agrees that BoJo is adept at “playing the game of becoming leader of the Conservative party.” As to the larger issues of uniting the party and the nation toward finalizing Brexit, these are, Lord Heseltine harrumphs, “key questions about achieving power and my doubts and reservations are very substantial.”

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

__________

DMI wishes its American friends a happy ‘Constitution Day’!

On the Record | What Would Disraeli Do?

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘What Would Disraeli Do?’:

What would Benjamin Disraeli do? And what would Britain’s great 19^th-century Conservative prime minister, born in the Jewish faith, say to Frank Field, the veteran member of Parliament who resigned the Labor whip prior to the autumn session, over the issue of anti-Semitism? Mr. Field warned his fellow Labor members: “We are increasingly seen as a racist party.”

It’s impossible to imagine Disraeli would have failed to address the anti-Semitism. One biographer calls him a lifelong booster of “one of the oldest races in the world.” Dizzy (as he was popularly known) boasted that a Jewish civilization was thriving when “the inhabitants of England were going half-naked and eating acorns.”

He would understand, too, that a fish rots from the head. So no doubt Disraeli would place much of the blame for the corruption of Labor with its leader. He would not be fooled by Jeremy Corbyn’s attempt to characterize his views as a quarrel with Israel.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Brexit Drama about to Begin Its Grand Finale

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Brexit Drama about to Begin Its Grand Finale’:

Late August and change is in the air. A shifting and a shuffling of priorities. Summer’s pleasantries are coming to an end. Time for important work to be taken up once more. The London Sun knows what it’s about: “The silly season is coming to an end but it seems only Britain is getting serious.” With its withdrawal from the European Union looming in March next year, the United Kingdom is preparing for no deal.

Would it ever have been otherwise?

Hard to say. Had the British government been less dithering and more proactive, it may have been possible to drive home a mutually beneficial deal. It may still be, though the shortening timespan makes this unlikely. It is, in any event, growing more difficult by the hour to get beyond the fact that Brussels officials lack the incentive to cooperate with the Brexit program and every enticement to frustrate secession.

They know Continental discontents are watching Britain’s maneuvers closely and taking notes, either to twist their own concessions out of the EU or model their own exit proposals. There is good reason to remember William Pitt the Younger’s words on his battles with Napoleon. “Let us hope that England, having saved herself by her energy, may save Europe by her example,” he said. It turns out this isn’t the first time that Britain’s cause has been the cause of every freedom-loving European.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Johnson says Brexit can be done

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Johnson says Brexit can be done’:

Today marks a Brexit milestone. Alongside the June 2016 referendum and the Prime Minister’s Lancaster House speech of January 2017 will stand Boris Johnson’s personal statement to the House of Commons. It has one theme: “It is not too late to save Brexit.”

Doubtless this is the opening salvo of more challenges to come, for which Mr. Johnson now leads the pack. In other words, while it may not be too late to save Brexit, it may be too late to save Theresa May’s leadership of the Conservative Party.

Mr. Johnson’s resignation last week as foreign secretary came three days after Mrs. May’s Cabinet summit Friday at the premier’s official country seat, Chequers. She capitulated to the European Union and betrayed the promise of Brexit.

The subsequent white paper outlining the government’s formal position only added insult to injury as the full extent of her opening round of appeasement became known. “In important ways this is BINO or Brino or Brexit in name only,” Mr. Johnson told the House, adding that he was “of course unable to support it.”

Mr. Johnson’s verbal shot mightn’t be heard round the world, but it was a shot across the Prime Minister’s bow with advice that she “can fix that vision once again before us” and “deliver a great Brexit for Britain” to “unite this party, unite this House, and unite the country.”

Time, though, grows short. The initial referendum euphoria of Britain realizing its own Independence Day was soon obscured by “a fog of self-doubt.” Instead of riding high on the flooding tide of fortune, Mr. Johnson bemoaned, Britain “dithered” and “burned through negotiating capital.”

Now, Mr. Johnson said, “after 18 months of stealthy retreat,” Britain had come “from the bright certainties” of Lancaster House, where Mrs. May outlined her goals and negotiating strategy, to the Chequers agreement, where she upended them.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Trump may meet BoJo in Brexit row

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Trump may meet BoJo in Brexit row’:

Could Boris Johnson emerge from the debacle of Chequers to become prime minister of Britain? That is the question following Theresa May’s capitulation, where she committed the government to a soft-Brexit that seems foredoomed to satisfy neither the Remainers or those who want to hold out for the expressed will of Britons for full independence.

Mrs. May’s Brexit secretary, David Davis, was first to resign late Sunday. In his resignation letter, Mr. Davis wrote that he feared “the current trend of policy and tactics is making” leaving the EU customs and regulatory framework “look less and less likely” and that the upshot of Chequers “will be to make the supposed control by Parliament illusory rather than real.”

The foreign secretary made his move the following morning. In his letter taking leave of office, Mr. Johnson feared that the Brexit “dream is dying, suffocated by needless self-doubt.” The government’s position on Brexit, he said, means that Britain is “truly headed for the status of colony,” even before Brussels has made its counter-proposal.

With the Chequers agreement in hand, Mr. Johnson said “the Government now has a song to sing” but, having “practiced the words over the weekend,” he admitted that “they stick in the throat.”

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Time’s Come for New PM for Britain

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Time’s Come for New PM for Britain’:

Conservatives backing Brexit will find no peace until Theresa May is removed from office. That is the conclusion of this correspondent following Friday’s meeting of the prime minister and cabinet to finalize the government’s proposals for a new working relationship with the European Union.

Mrs. May has failed the British voters, who in June 2016 decided to leave the EU. They voted for a strategy of global bilateral trade deals, with Britain freed from the strait-jacket of tariffs and regulations imposed by the Brussels bureaucracy. Mrs. May nonetheless reached at Chequers an agreement within the government envisaging an EU common policy with respect to goods and agri-foods, ostensibly to ease trade with the Continent.

Yet such a policy is crosswise with the Brexit vote. For it would make future international trade deals extremely difficult, as Britain would enter talks about the composition of said deals compromised by its EU regulatory commitments. Adding insult to injury, Britain would no longer have a say in the formation of EU trade policy, being no longer a member.

Mrs. May has failed her Cabinet colleagues, by presenting them with a done deal and threatening those who would refuse to comply. She is “first among equals” in theory, but has treated her ministers as lackeys, with the framework of the Chequers agreement drawn up in advance of Friday’s conference.

Over a 12-hour period they were pressured into a “soft” Brexit compromise, meant to ease negotiations with Europe, allay fears of British businesses already competing on the Continent, and resolve the border issue with Ireland. Yet critics argue that Brexit is betrayed by surrendering the promise of independence back to Europe. Ministers were warned that resignations would be punished by immediate loss of limousine privileges, with taxi-fares made available for rides home.

The Bible teaches that it profits not a man to lose his soul for the whole world; now Brexit ministers sell out on principle on the mere promise of government transport.

Finally, the Prime Minister has failed her parliamentary party. And not for the first time. Last year she went to the polls in the belief that a weak Labor opposition would result in increased Tory seats to strengthen her Brexit hand. She miscalculated badly and was rewarded with a minority government. Recent polls now indicate that if the Brexit promise is broken, 45% of Conservative voters will abandon the party at the next election.

So what next? The Chequers agreement and the imminent white paper that expands on detail for legislation to come is almost certainly dead on arrival. Eurosceptic Tory MPs will vote against it, while little support can be hoped from opposing parliamentary parties, as politicians who want closer ties with Europe will frustrate the Government as much as possible.

Nor can it be expected that the Chequers agreement will be acceptable to Brussels, which will exploit Mrs. May’s opening round of EU concessions as precursors for more to come. This will be the opportunity for cowed Brexiteers who swallowed their pride at Chequers to save face, say “Enough is enough!,” and break ranks with No. 10.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | President Trump’s Brexit Opening

Please see my latest wire for The American Spectator, ‘President Trump’s Brexit Opening’:

London in July, and more than an unusual summer heat wave awaits Britain’s prime minister Theresa May. The Brexit timetable is “hotting up” as ministers prepare to finalize the Government’s list of demands for Brussels, while restive Conservative MPs jostle for position to defenestrate their leader once the European Union deal is done. As tensions heighten, can President Trump offer respite to his beleaguered British counterpart?

The Cabinet meets this Friday at the premier’s country retreat at Chequers, where they will thrash out the Government’s white paper setting out the objectives for its future social, economic, and security relationship with Europe. Too little, too late, is the general consensus, as the formal Brexit separation takes place next March: while various measures and proposals have been drawn up and discussed desultorily, none have benefited from rigorous analysis, and now Brexiteers are fearful that the Cabinet will be presented with a fait accompli, take-it-or-leave-it Damoclean sword dangling over their heads.

Rumors circulate, for instance, that Mrs. May will propose abiding by European single market rules for goods, leaving the corollary of free movement of labor for the UK-EU negotiating table — ostensibly on the grounds that, as the United Kingdom currently abides by these regulations, this trade component can be quickly agreed by the two parties. Yet her critics argue that this concession empowers the EU to continue dictating terms, frustrating British attempts to innovate and compete for international trade agreements. Brussels mandarins, who habitually voice their disdain for Britain’s “independence” initiative, have no incentive to coöperate and encourage discontent on the Continent. They regularly back-foot Mrs. May and her Brexit ministers.

“Nothing durable can be accomplished without the impulse of general concurrence,” wrote Germaine de Staël, during those unfortunate “eras in history when the course of national feeling is dependent on a single man.” Woe to Britain that its fate rests with Theresa May, unloved by Conservatives, and overwhelmed and underwhelming on the Brexit file.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Wlady Pleszczynski of The American Spectator.

On the Record | Imagine Trump Doing Brexit, Johnson Says

Please see my latest wire as Brexit diarist for The New York Sun, ‘Imagine Trump Doing Brexit, Johnson Says’:

Don’t expect fireworks over London tonight on the second anniversary of the Brexit vote. Murmurs of satisfaction in Brussels are more likely, as European Union mandarins congratulate themselves on casting a spanner into Britain’s efforts to save itself from the continent’s super state.

Brexiteers sold independence at least partly on the basis that EU trade restrictions penalized British producers and consumers, imposing high tariffs within the bloc and keeping members from enjoying more favorable trade relationships with non-member countries. Freed from the EU’s regulatory and protectionist barriers, Britain could once more compete on the global stage and negotiate agreements with Europe that were mutually agreeable.

All trade is based on this win-win scenario, but Brussels will have none of it. Officials far prefer to keep impediments in place that are equally damaging to its member states and to Britain and, perhaps far more important given the rise of protest parties, signal that opposition to EU diktat will not be tolerated.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Seth Lipsky of The New York Sun.

On the Record | Brexit’s Exit Light Remains On

Please see my latest wire for The American Spectator, ‘Brexit’s Exit Light Remains On’:

Queried about the Waterloo battle that witnessed the defeat of Napoleon and his dream of continental conquest, victorious British general the Duke of Wellington replied: “It has been a damned nice thing — the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life.” Brexit supporters doubtless are equally apprehensive about the success of Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union as the two-year anniversary of their momentous vote nears.

From the start, the Brexit campaign was fraught with uncertainty. It began as a throw-away promise by then prime minister David Cameron to placate Europhile MPs in his Conservative caucus, a concession he never thought he’d live to regret until that June 23 vote in 2016 in which a majority of Britons voted for “Leave.” Mr. Cameron resigned and in the race to succeed him three leading Brexit campaigners — Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, and Andrea Leadsom — had their hopes dashed as “Remain” supporter Theresa May won the race.

Whatever euphoria Brexiteers initially may have enjoyed was soon dashed, too. Government plans to proceed with Brexit negotiations with the EU fell afoul of demands that Parliament be consulted. After legislation passed both Houses of Parliament and received Royal Assent Mrs. May, over-confident of her ministry’s support in the country, went to the polls against a seemingly weak opposition to strengthen her hand for future negotiations and badly miscalculated, losing her majority, her momentum, and her credibility in the process.

Read more . . .

__________

My thanks to editor Wlady Pleszczynski of The American Spectator.