London would like to negotiate the rules for Northern Ireland again

The Brexit rules, which concern the transit of goods from the Northern Irish border, are unwelcome in London due to the practical problems they are generating and this has led the British government to ask Brussels to change this regulation. In his speech to the House of Lords, the Brexit minister expressly affirmed the need for essential changes to the protocol for Northern Ireland already agreed with the European Union. The institutional situation that could be created and which has been perceived as a possible threat in Brussels, could be the use of the application of Article 16, which can allow both parties to withdraw from the signed rules and which regulate the entire exit. of Great Britain from the Union. An eventuality that could have dire consequences for relations between London and Brussels and which includes various possible solutions: from a total break up to a very unlikely resumption of negotiations. Between the two sides, although both have a lot to lose with a possible suspension of the laboriously reached agreements, Great Britain appears to have greater disadvantages in perspective, with the absence of common rules for mutual commercial relations. If the intention of the British minister was to threaten a withdrawal from the agreements, the impression is that it was an almost desperate move, which signals the inability of London to manage a freely signed situation; after all, the European reaction was the one widely expected: a refusal to renegotiate the protocol, deeming this solution unacceptable, even though it was willing to seek solutions to solve the problems. The European position seems to be a manifestation of good will, but not entirely real, in the sense that exhibiting a show of strength could be favorable to the British, conversely a more firm attitude, in compliance with what was signed, but still collaborative exposes London to research of non-traumatic solutions. The reason for the dispute remains the European controls imposed on goods entering the Northern Irish border, considered excessive by London; however this choice was forced in order not to introduce customs controls with what is a state that no longer belongs to the Union. London has probably underestimated the practical difficulties of these controls or caused these difficulties precisely to renegotiate the use of the only physical contact on land with the Union; even the British explanations, in search of a new equilibrium, also in aid of Brussels to protect its single market, appear specious and suspicious. The most likely reading is that the British government suffers from a situation created by itself, which is a mixture of incompetence and impudence, where the aim is to circumvent the rules signed to access the European market by a shortcut, which is widely foreseen by the ‘ European Union. A further assessment to be made is that the protocol concerning Northern Ireland is the most sensitive issue for the most extreme nationalists, who represent a significant share of Boris Johnson’s electorate and, despite a large majority approval by the English parliament, remain a highly contested issue, becoming a factor of balance of the conservative party’s assets. The difficulties of the British government must take into account all the components to be able to maintain power and the Brexit issue was decisive in reaching power through the last elections: a lack of support from the most extreme parts of the nationalists can nullify the project of governability of the London premier. In the current state of affairs, the judgment on the British government touches on unreliability because it claims to renegotiate the rules that have just been signed, which have certainly not been imposed by Europe: yet another confirmation, that, in spite of everything, the English exit from Europe , in the long run, it can only be advantageous for Brussels, because, on the political level, the lost member is a member who does not guarantee any space for shared planning and represents a lesson that cannot be applied to other members of convenience, as was the United Kingdom itself, to bring the European Union back into its founding aims, leaving aside a forced inclusiveness that is not justified by general convenience.