Boris Johnsons' secret Brexit plan is self-isolation

Of course there will be a Brexit trade agreement. Both sides have too much to lose from failure. Boris Johnson trained on this. The British Prime Minister will quietly submit to Brussels while claiming a famous victory. The EU will bend just enough to supply the vine leaf.

The counter-box is just as easy to make. Mr Johnson has a large and stable majority in Parliament. His party is united in wanting to raise the drawbridge on his own continent. His attachment to a narrow interpretation of national sovereignty has become an obsession. Addicted as he is with great gestures, and never troubled by the facts, the Prime Minister will lead the United Kingdom over the cliff.

What unites the two sets of predictions, offered interchangeably by well-intentioned commentators, is the absence of anything beyond, well, a cloudy crystal ball. Of course, logic indicates a fudge on, say, monitoring the level playing field that is necessary for a comprehensive trade agreement. But Brexit is a project dominated by emotion. The Conservatives were once hard-headed pragmatists. Now they are the champions of English nationalism.

While the two sides have argued over what is known as "dynamic alignment" of competition policy, labor standards, climate rules and other regulatory regimes, the real history is hidden from view. Skirmishes are a diversion. Mr. Johnson has a plan. To borrow an expression from the Covid-19 crisis, we speak of self-isolation. All traces of the EU must be erased from the British public domain.

The European side has not yet made its way. He prepared a prospectus for a comprehensive agreement, going far beyond trade and investment flows towards judicial cooperation, climate change, regulation of medicines, chemicals, data transfers and the like, and foreign and defense collaboration. As the European Council declaration approving the EU negotiating position said: "This confirms our desire to offer an ambitious, extensive and balanced partnership in the UK for the benefit of both parties."

You cannot blame Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, and his team for this ambition. Theresa May’s government has repeatedly said that even if it left the single market and the customs union, Britain simply wanted a "deep and special partnership". For his part, Mr Johnson agreed with the same sentiment when he approved the declaration of political intent accompanying the Brexit withdrawal agreement.

What has happened since then is that the Prime Minister decided that an electoral victory gave him the right to tear apart the commitments and aspirations of the past. The irreducible objective now, as the British government explains in its objectives for the negotiations, is that Great Britain "totally recover its economic and political independence ”. Nothing in future relations can encroach, in any dimension or to a lesser extent, on British sovereignty.

Ministers gave a glimpse of what this means in practice when they announced last week that Britain was leaving the European Aviation Safety Agency – the organization that certifies safety from the sky. According to them, membership of the agency "is not compatible with real economic and political independence of the United Kingdom".

Most people will be confused as to how shared rules for ensuring flight safety could threaten British nationality, but this is where identity policy leads. The agency ultimately reports to the European Court of Justice. Ergo, that diminishes sovereignty. The same is apparently true for a multitude of agencies from which Britain will depart – watchdogs for drugs, chemicals, atomic energy and data sharing for example.

The government says it wants to negotiate bilateral agreements on these issues, but only on its own terms. The EU must accept exclude "any obligation so that our laws are aligned with those of the EU, or so that the institutions of the EU, including the Court of Justice, have any jurisdiction in the United Kingdom. " So that there is no doubt, Britain will also not sign "institutionalized" arrangements for foreign or defense policy. Law enforcement and judicial cooperation "must in no way hinder the autonomy of the British legal system".

Add to that the intention to abandon European road transport, space, navigation, education and energy programs, and the disruption is complete. Mr Johnson will accept a fisheries agreement allowing access to the territorial waters of Great Britain, but it must be renewed every year in accordance with a key vision of sovereignty. As for Britain's demand for a regime without tariffs or quotas for trade in goods and agricultural products, the EU should expect nothing in return. Brussels would simply have to accept that the arrangement would be mutually beneficial.

The government refuses to publish its assessment of the economic impact of its position. Michael Gove, the minister in charge of negotiations, believes that such an analysis could be misunderstood. So much for the Brexiters' claim to "trust the people". Mr Gove however plans to translate his demands into the language of a draft treaty.

Mr. Barnier will then have a choice. It could continue to seek a far-reaching agreement. It would be much better to believe the government in the word and clarify what the EU would offer in a minimalist deal. This, of course, would be far below Mr. Johnson's hope of achieving free trade. This would have the great advantage of revealing the cost of self-isolation.

[email protected]

Follow Philip Stephens with myFT and on Twitter