CANZUK

[Pannonian]

Trust is a delicate thing. For 50 years the West has had absolute faith in the USA. Now... it has gone: we don't trust the POTUS and would he declare War and enable assets to help the UK if he wasn't invited to Harry's wedding? If he was in a Twitter War with France would he then not help in a real war? A year ago people would have said these are two completely different things but now who knows for sure? Might it be used as a negation tool or require others to publicly beg for assistance?

Up until now whatever else I've personally never thought that the USA might not be there. But of course prior to 1941 they were not. And in fact there are many times they have not assisted. So perhaps this has been a wake up that the West has become too complacent.

All my life, and going back some generations as well, I've assumed that Russian foreign policy won't be looking out for British interests. Yet nowadays, sections of the British and European right are in cahoots with Russia on interference with their domestic affairs. And with both far left and far right favouring Russian involvement in their affairs, the centre is regarded with distaste as a vehicle for compromise (spit). British politics has never been so hopeless in my life time.

[Furunculus]

All my life, and going back some generations as well, I've assumed that Russian foreign policy won't be looking out for British interests. Yet nowadays, sections of the British and European right are in cahoots with Russia on interference with their domestic affairs. And with both far left and far right favouring Russian involvement in their affairs, the centre is regarded with distaste as a vehicle for compromise (spit). British politics has never been so hopeless in my life time.

Which parts of the British right? I'm looking for a significant and substantial element of the right wing establishment, over some sustained period. Similar perhaps in scale and duration to the lefts infatuation with the soviet Union...

[Gilrandir]

Yet nowadays, sections of the British and European right are in cahoots with Russia on interference with their domestic affairs. And with both far left and far right favouring Russian involvement in their affairs, the centre is regarded with distaste as a vehicle for compromise (spit).

Are you sure that these preferences on the part of the far rights and lefts are genuine and not paid for?

[Pannonian]

Are you sure that these preferences on the part of the far rights and lefts are genuine and not paid for?

I don't think they can tell the difference. See the far right and far left combining to take the UK out of the EU despite obviously weakening the UK and despite Russian agents being shown to have had a hand in it, whilst parading the Great British Patriotic Future. Even if Farage and co are shown to be directed by Russia, they will still rationalise it as the way to ensure Britain's future.

[rory_20_uk]

I don't think they can tell the difference. See the far right and far left combining to take the UK out of the EU despite obviously weakening the UK and despite Russian agents being shown to have had a hand in it, whilst parading the Great British Patriotic Future. Even if Farage and co are shown to be directed by Russia, they will still rationalise it as the way to ensure Britain's future.

"Obviously" weakening the UK? In that the EU is making punitive demands, then yes, the UK will be weaker at the very least for a time. But then I never realised that the EU is a buttress against Russia. If so it is doing a pretty crap job - NATO on the other hand (thanks 80% to the USA) is providing more of a deterrent.

The EU is so amazingly weak that there is not a single conflict anywhere on the periphery of the EU that the EU has managed to do anything about. Oh, aside from hand-wringing.

Britain and France are managing to cooperate in Africa with... the two countries talking without any part of the EU apparatus involved. Is that sort of thing even legal any more? Should't we go to the MEPs to debate, to hold some meetings and get EUCOM started? Add a few layers of oversight, months/years delay and with any luck the problem will have ended before we even get started.

[Greyblades]

I have learned to never underestimate the modern briton's eagerness to sell his nation short.

[HopAlongBunny]

CANZUK highlights some of the discussions involving NAFTA.
It's not that Canada and Mexico don't want a deal with the U.S., its just that they have options.
While a renewed NAFTA would be ideal, there is no reason to accept a bad deal. The "burden of adjustment" would be felt by all, but nobody views it as fatal.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/29/...izer-freeland/

Trump would like a "win". It's questionable he has the deal making chops to get it on his terms.

[rory_20_uk]

Whatever the deal, he'll call it a "win". Few are qualified to unpick what the deal is and between lies and cries of "Fake News!!!" his base will believe it is a win.

He also now says he'd join the Paris agreement and TPP both if they are "fair" to the USA. Again, he could just say that some minor / non existent changes made it "fair" and it was all down to his negotiating skills.