The unofficial anthem of the (British) Royal Navy is based on an 18C poem, famously set to music by Thomas Arne. The refrain goes: “Rule, Britannia! Rule the waves; Britons never, never, never, never will be slaves.”
I haven’t beat up on the Brexiteers for a while, so the latest kerfuffle provides a good opportunity to do so. The “return to [Tory] normalcy” embodied by Rishi Sunak’s administration has manifested itself in this regard by finally striking a deal with the EU over the status of Northern Ireland. Such a deal was feasible when the negotiations began in 2018 and it took this long primarily because of table-pounding by those who are still living in the (early) 20C in terms of the British Empire. Even now, Boris is unsure he can support it (although specific critiques and alternatives are, as usual, lacking).
Attention has now turned to one of the principal proffered rationales for the entire Brexit process, i.e., the country’s inability to control its borders. Now that the UK is freed from the tyranny of the Eurocrats of Brussels, it has struggled to come up with a way of dealing with immigrants, most of whom (people of color) have gone through unbelievable dangers and deprivation to find opportunity in the country that claims to be the historical champion of liberty.
One might think that with a Prime Minister and Home Secretary both of whom are children of immigrants that British policy would be sympathetic and supportive. Instead, in the manner of pulling up the drawbridge after you have safely scuttled inside the castle, Sunak and Braverman have concocted a couple of “play-to-the-electoral-base” schemes for dealing with asylum seekers and other immigrants.
Last year, they developed a plan to ship these poor folks to Rwanda. Yes, in the middle of East Africa, about 2,000 miles away (even further than most of these immigrants have traveled). Now, I won’t even get into the legal complications (domestic and international) of this plan, but the whole thing smacks of imperialism redux. The Tories don’t care about the optics or the ethics, but the legalities have tied this up in the courts.
Which leads us to the latest bit of “Little England” cleverness. Under the newest proposal, immigrants seeking asylum who make it across the Channel will be deemed illegal and deported if they arrive in “small boats.” You don’t need to get into such underlying questions as morality, justice, and international law, the causes of international migration (poverty, war, oppression, etc.) to be gob-smacked by this approach.
Apparently, if you come over on a plane or take the train through the Chunnel, you’re OK. Presumably, if you paddle in on a surfboard (or swim across the Channel), you’re OK. If you arrive on a “large boat” (e.g., a Russian oligarch on his super-yacht), you’re OK. Will they have a tape measure on hand in Dover Harbor to assess the length of the boat? Go figure.
Apparently the last time this many small boats were active in the Channel was during the evacuation of Dunkirk (1940). Times have changed.
Apparently, the Royal Navy can’t stop the onslaught. The island’s defenses, sturdy enough to deter both Napoleon and Hitler (“fight them on the beaches” and all that), are no longer up to the task. Apparently, Britannia no longer “rules the waves.”
This plan, too, seems to violate international law on the treatment of asylum seekers and will be undoubtedly challenged in court should it make it through Parliament. But, it is the attitudes of the British Government which are more striking that the questions of formal compliance. Britain’s loss of control of its borders has little to do with its participation in the EU. The Government thinks they’re back in the era of Admiral Lord Nelson or First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill. However, the Royal Navy can’t cut it anymore; its impotence a sobering symbol of the decline of British global/imperial/military power.
It's this longing for the grandeur of the past that lays behind the entire Brexit project. For the past eighty years, the UK has been trying to deal with its imperial decline: Humiliated by an abortive invasion of Egypt during the 1956 Suez Crisis; watching most of the Empire peel off by the 1960s; finding some solace in the EU from the 1970s (until 2021). If it weren’t for the perennial reluctance of Italy to become modern, the UK would be the 4th largest economy in Western Europe. It’s already being outpaced by the former “jewel in its imperial crown” (India). It’s a long way to fall and it will take another generation for this all to sink in.
Brexit may have ensured that Britons will “never, never, never, never be slaves” to Brussels. Freeing themselves from the past is another matter entirely.
I haven’t beat up on the Brexiteers for a while, so the latest kerfuffle provides a good opportunity to do so. The “return to [Tory] normalcy” embodied by Rishi Sunak’s administration has manifested itself in this regard by finally striking a deal with the EU over the status of Northern Ireland. Such a deal was feasible when the negotiations began in 2018 and it took this long primarily because of table-pounding by those who are still living in the (early) 20C in terms of the British Empire. Even now, Boris is unsure he can support it (although specific critiques and alternatives are, as usual, lacking).
Attention has now turned to one of the principal proffered rationales for the entire Brexit process, i.e., the country’s inability to control its borders. Now that the UK is freed from the tyranny of the Eurocrats of Brussels, it has struggled to come up with a way of dealing with immigrants, most of whom (people of color) have gone through unbelievable dangers and deprivation to find opportunity in the country that claims to be the historical champion of liberty.
One might think that with a Prime Minister and Home Secretary both of whom are children of immigrants that British policy would be sympathetic and supportive. Instead, in the manner of pulling up the drawbridge after you have safely scuttled inside the castle, Sunak and Braverman have concocted a couple of “play-to-the-electoral-base” schemes for dealing with asylum seekers and other immigrants.
Last year, they developed a plan to ship these poor folks to Rwanda. Yes, in the middle of East Africa, about 2,000 miles away (even further than most of these immigrants have traveled). Now, I won’t even get into the legal complications (domestic and international) of this plan, but the whole thing smacks of imperialism redux. The Tories don’t care about the optics or the ethics, but the legalities have tied this up in the courts.
Which leads us to the latest bit of “Little England” cleverness. Under the newest proposal, immigrants seeking asylum who make it across the Channel will be deemed illegal and deported if they arrive in “small boats.” You don’t need to get into such underlying questions as morality, justice, and international law, the causes of international migration (poverty, war, oppression, etc.) to be gob-smacked by this approach.
Apparently, if you come over on a plane or take the train through the Chunnel, you’re OK. Presumably, if you paddle in on a surfboard (or swim across the Channel), you’re OK. If you arrive on a “large boat” (e.g., a Russian oligarch on his super-yacht), you’re OK. Will they have a tape measure on hand in Dover Harbor to assess the length of the boat? Go figure.
Apparently the last time this many small boats were active in the Channel was during the evacuation of Dunkirk (1940). Times have changed.
Apparently, the Royal Navy can’t stop the onslaught. The island’s defenses, sturdy enough to deter both Napoleon and Hitler (“fight them on the beaches” and all that), are no longer up to the task. Apparently, Britannia no longer “rules the waves.”
This plan, too, seems to violate international law on the treatment of asylum seekers and will be undoubtedly challenged in court should it make it through Parliament. But, it is the attitudes of the British Government which are more striking that the questions of formal compliance. Britain’s loss of control of its borders has little to do with its participation in the EU. The Government thinks they’re back in the era of Admiral Lord Nelson or First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill. However, the Royal Navy can’t cut it anymore; its impotence a sobering symbol of the decline of British global/imperial/military power.
It's this longing for the grandeur of the past that lays behind the entire Brexit project. For the past eighty years, the UK has been trying to deal with its imperial decline: Humiliated by an abortive invasion of Egypt during the 1956 Suez Crisis; watching most of the Empire peel off by the 1960s; finding some solace in the EU from the 1970s (until 2021). If it weren’t for the perennial reluctance of Italy to become modern, the UK would be the 4th largest economy in Western Europe. It’s already being outpaced by the former “jewel in its imperial crown” (India). It’s a long way to fall and it will take another generation for this all to sink in.
Brexit may have ensured that Britons will “never, never, never, never be slaves” to Brussels. Freeing themselves from the past is another matter entirely.
RSS Feed