The Foreign Secretary stood up in the
House of Commons this week and very sombrely announced sanctions against China.
His argument was that it is completely unacceptable that a country should
breach an international treaty to which it had signed up. But hold on a moment:
the EU Withdrawal Agreement is an international treaty on which the UK
Government is attempting to renege daily. And government MPs are amongst the
authors of a new
report advocating that the UK should unilaterally repudiate that
agreement and present the EU with a new one, on a ‘take it or leave it’ basis,
to replace it. For English exceptionalists, it seems that the grand and important
principle that states should abide by agreements they make only applies to other,
lesser countries. Such are, apparently, the ‘great British values’ to which we
are all supposed to subscribe.
Posts
Phil Parkinson: Wrexham should have been clear before late equaliser
-
Phil Parkinson was left to regret Wrexham’s finishing as his side dropped
two points in the race for League One promotion after looking for much of
the 1...
1 hour ago
3 comments:
Raab - what a prize arse. Yet he is an accurate representation of the entitled arrogant supremacist bunch of shits now running the U.K. Sadly they can claim to be doing it "in our name" because we gave them an 80 seat majority. This should fire up a serious secessionist spirit in Wales like it as for a while in Scotland but hardly a flicker. Explain.
The EU Withdrawal Agreement: the first part was binding which referenced the mechanism and the second part was the Political Statement which was full of loving words which both sides agreed was not binding.
Since history was recorded countries have broken, sorry- put aside agreements, when they find circumstances have changed. I think the bit of bother we are going through might qualify since this agreement was given life.
Spirit,
"...the first part was binding which referenced the mechanism and the second part was the Political Statement which was full of loving words which both sides agreed was not binding" True. But HMG is attempting to renege on elements of both parts.
"Since history was recorded countries have broken, sorry- put aside agreements," Also true. But it ill behoves a state which is doing precisely that to criticise another state for doing the same thing.
Post a Comment