Brexit, borders and baseless beliefs
The complexities surrounding Brexit's impact on migration and border control continue to unfold with profound implications, revealing a series of miscalculations and oversights by pro-Brexit advocates. Initially, Brexit was sold on the promise of regained sovereignty and control over the UK's borders. However, the reality has been far different, demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of border dynamics and the interconnectedness of modern world politics.
The repercussions of Brexit are starkly evident in Northern Ireland. Implementing the Northern Ireland Protocol, which effectively established a customs border in the Irish Sea, directly resulted from Brexit's disregard for the delicate equilibrium achieved by the Good Friday Agreement. The practical challenges of maintaining an open border on the island of Ireland, crucial for peace, were often overlooked in pro-Brexit arguments. This oversight has led to substantial trade barriers between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, fueling political tension and economic inefficiency.
The pro-Brexit camp's arguments frequently underestimated the complexity of modern border control, which involves more than just stopping people and goods at border points. Effective border management in the 21st century requires a nuanced understanding of logistics, legal frameworks, and international cooperation. Brexit has disrupted these systems, mainly through the UK's departure from the Dublin III Regulation. This framework allowed asylum seekers to return to their first entry point into the EU. This mechanism streamlined asylum processes across member states and reduced the burden on border countries.
By exiting the Dublin III Regulation, the UK has not only forfeited an effective tool for managing migration flows but has also heightened the potential for irregular migration patterns that are more challenging to monitor and control. This change has necessitated the creation of new, untested systems that have yet to demonstrate their effectiveness, placing further strain on UK resources and border security.
The economic ramifications are significant, as seen in the delays and costs associated with new border checks and customs procedures. These have been particularly acute in sectors highly integrated across borders, such as agriculture and manufacturing. The pro-Brexit argument that leaving the EU would reduce bureaucratic red tape has, in reality, increased such burdens for many businesses, especially smaller firms less equipped to handle these challenges.
Moreover, the social and human costs are escalating. The divisive rhetoric around Brexit has not only strained relations with EU countries. Still, it has also stoked nationalism and xenophobia within the UK. This environment has made rational discourse on migration and asylum policies increasingly tricky, pushing the government toward more hardline stances that compromise human rights and international obligations.
The unfolding situation demands a critical reevaluation of the pro-Brexit stance. The simplistic arguments for regained control and sovereignty need to account for the realities of modern governance, international law, and global cooperation. The narrative that Brexit would allow the UK to reclaim control over its borders and reduce immigration has proven misguided. It has led to more significant complications and costs.
The UK must adopt a more integrated and informed approach to border management and international relations to navigate the post-Brexit landscape. This entails fostering stronger cooperation with remaining EU countries and other international partners, particularly Ireland, to tackle shared challenges in migration management and regional security. It also involves recognizing the limitations of national solutions to inherently transnational problems, such as migration and human security.
In sum, the pro-Brexit arguments, which underestimated the complexity and interdependence of modern borders, have led the UK into a series of dilemmas that continue to challenge its economic stability, social cohesion, and international standing. The time is ripe for a comprehensive reassessment of these positions to better align with the realities of a globally interconnected world.
Thanks for reading. You can support and reward me via:
Pay Pal — lauvlad89@gmail.com
Algo — NCG6LBALQHENQUSR77KOR6SS42FGK54BZ5L2HFDSBGQVLGYIOVWYDXFDI4
ADA — addr1q9vfs6nqz4xmtnpljwhv4tukyskd2g7enxd87rpugkwwvfun5pnla5d5tes2mvurrc77e7837yd0scrfk063qlha8wgs8d4ynz
Bitcoin 3HbxyDXE9MhNQ8RqsirqgYvFupQzh5Xby2
ETH — 0x8982cdb97bd23f092f78a16a4fc93c5c4607a285
Seeds — vladlausevic
Skycoin — ZxjhWMJRbTNCRQzy5MekZzH4fhdWFCqBP8
Tezos — tz1QrRzkTAKuPKF8dmGW6c1ScEHBUGvoiJBM
