ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
they are not protecting the interests of their members. they are protecting political objectives.
be rational about it. consider say the air travel situation, it is claimed that if no agreement is reached, UK operators will lose thier license to fly over Europe. what affect will that have on tourism in the Mediterranean members? it may follow that European carriers would be barred from flying over UK, so all their transatlantic traffic would have to take substantial detours, adding fuel cost and time. so in reality its in the interest of both parties to sort out a sensible agreement. this sort of analysis can be applied to any policy area, they hurt us they hurt themselves. i wouldn't for a moment say "they need us more than we need them" but the fact is Europeans, not the EU politicians, would be worse off with a poor or no deal scenario, than with an amicable one.
That's true and I agree with you, but by the same token it wasn't in The EU's or anyone's interest for Greece to jettison out of the Eurozone and The EU a few years back without a deal, it would have be pretty disastrous for all concerned, but that was the possibility facing everyone as highlighted by Yanis Varoufakis. Politics was the prime objective there.
The Foreign Affairs Select Committee has used the phrase 'mutually assured destruction' to describe the 'no deal' scenario and called the possibility 50/50. We'll see what happens and if the worse does happen, the mutual blame game will just carry on and on. It's a mess to me whichever way I look at it at present.