Brexit the Success

Just for a moment lets imagine Brexit as a success. The day after the referendum David Cameron resigns and within weeks Theresa May is in place. She looks at the situation and see’s the contradictions that the leave campaign played but also shrewdly the main reasons for Brexit to sell this to all sides. She was adamant that the 48% should not be ignored.
Conciliation is sought for the 48% of the country, with a clear directive that we must leave the EU. The Northern Ireland border is highlighted immediately as to why we must stay in the customs union and Single market and the Norway model is pushed as the right way forward. Under this model the EU are happy to progress with trade talks and Article 50 is initiated.
The government gains widespread support for the model and although some in the tory party and UKIP feel this is still too close to the EU, reporting shows all sides saying this model as the preferred option before the referendum, allows the critics to be ignored as extremists. The Northern Ireland border issue is never contentious, the remainers who see that we keep some of the benefits of the EU but still keep the referendum result are predominantly satisfied and although some still feel that we should stay in the EU, the consensus has swung towards this deal. Once this has been agreed the UK government are then free to focus on the main issues that dominate the public’s life. The NHS, education and our public service gain a boost from the economic certainties and tax revenues rise. Theresa Mays popularity is strong as Labour fall into a crisis of confidence over anti-Semitism. Her strong position is maintained until the 2020 election, where she wins a landslide victory.
They say hindsight is a wonderful thing, but what has happened after the referendum result is nothing short of criminal, as politicians played with this countries future for their own political glory. The rich have influenced this government to the extent that its future is being gambled away, while the likes of Rees-Mugg move their business dealings to capitalise on Brexit. Nigel Lawson and Nigel Farage ensure they and their family have EU citizenship and have the advantages they desperately want taken away from the people of this country.
The statements made by these politicians stating they have no concerns about the border show a total disregard for the people of this country and show the narrow view they take on the future and for themselves. They care nothing for the people of this country and the problems they are having. The lies they won the referendum on are regurgitated with no real plan as to how they will achieve this. This is why Brexit is such an utter failure. There own vain interests and agendas are pushed as a national agenda and to hell with the people. This has to stop. Without this absence of leadership and rational, Brexit could have been successful, in some ways it still could, but the two years of utter failure have led to entrenched beliefs and poor rhetoric which many now cannot take back. Boris Johnson the case in point, where he feels the only way he can keep himself in the news, is to make more outlandish comments. His advisor Bannon, Trumps right hand orifice, always knowing how to stoke the fires of hate and nationalism.
Our only chance now to heal the nation is a second vote. This should have several options, including no deal and the Norway model. This will show what people are now voting for, rather than some mystical land of opportunity that does not exist.
This week the ‘chequers plan’ is dead in the water and the rhetoric against the EU is only worsening our relationship and the situation. If we are to have a Brexit success and a united nation, our politicians need to think of the country and not of their careers.

A Syrian and UN Catastrophe

So, yet another chemical attack on civilians has occurred and the world condemns but does little to change the situation. This failure of weak regimes in the US and expansionists in Russia and China mean the nation state should no longer have the power over the rest of the world that five countries currently hold. The UN and its security council needs to be run as a democracy, not left to the whim of selfish governments who are seen as major powers but use it like childish bullies.
The first step is to remove the veto from the security council. Each region should have an equal representation and a commanding majority should be needed for action to be in place (2/3rd majority). The permanent members should lose this position and the 15-20 states should rotate on a yearly basis.
All aid should go through the UN and be directed through its committees, rather than used as bribes by ‘major states’.
All disputes should go to the SC and the solutions brought about through it. Any country or group that goes against this agreement would see the full might of world action against it and all solutions for its benefit to be removed. Once seen as the aggressor, they lose all communications and must surrender before coming back to the negotiating table.
This means several power shifts will happen. First, the major nations will not be allowed to bully smaller nations with aid or money, as one nation will make little difference overall, which should remove the bribery.
The second is by removing the veto no nation can hold undue influence. Yes, this means that the UK, France and the US, who once were the beacons of democracy will lose that influence. But by arguing against this it treats other nations as childish and unable to make a decision.
It would mean all conflicts/disputes could and eventually should go through UN diplomacy. An example of this would be if the Catalans went to the UN to ask for independence. Independent monitors could assess the situation on the ground to see if this is what the people want. If it was felt a vote was required, then this would be put in place with the UN observing and ensuring a fair vote is in place. The Catalan example is a good example because although there are some strong opinions about this, I have read that most Catalans, although proud of their region, are happy to be in Spain and the EU. The indepenece vote is being driven by a few and is only gathering momentum because of the Spanish reaction.
You can though see why this will not be allowed to happen with the current regimes. The expansionists to the East, with Russia and China, will never allow a mechanism where they are thwarted, because they will suddenly be against the whole international community rather than a single nation. This makes the gamble to great. They would not be building islands in the south china sea or invading Ukraine and annexing Crimea.
The US would never allow this either, not with the current regime, but also with the general influence in the US. This is because the major conflict that is still on going is the Israel/Palestinian conflict. The current regime in Israel is again taking full advantage of the malaise in the international community and is expanding its borders into Palestinian territories. Yet a solution that each would agree to, must favour no state and so only by an independent treaty will any solution be found. Both sides have fought too long to be seen as the side that gives too much.

Finally, it would allow the forgotten wars, such as the war in Yemen, to be dealt with, rather than millions of lives wasted fighting in a civil war that will never stop in the short term, unless one side is brutally removed.
These people are not savages or foreigners who we should ignore, but Humans with the same ambitions and needs as ourselves. This is why as nations we need to lose a bit of sovereignty and give this power to the UN. There will be states, individuals who will test its resolve. But it won’t happen more than twice before any aggressor sees the futility of fighting the whole community.
This though shows how out of step I am with current thinking. The fascist nationalism that is sweeping the western democracies has meant we are in the grip of the biggest self-harm in recent history. As Russian bots send out misinformation to undermine our democracies, we fight the wrong enemy. All with a grubby power sweep away from peace and towards the wars in the future. Power shared is power that is less likely to be abused. This is shown in the EU and the UN. When it is done correctly we see prosperity and peace in regions and the solidarity we have been shown with the chemical attack in Salisbury, shows the power of the group. We are about to lose this. Is the world about to see the same problems as war comes to more regions with no power to stop it?