n January 15, House of Commons of the United Kindom voted on Theresa May's draft Brexit deal. British MPs resoundingly rejected it, 432 to 202, making it one of the biggest defeats for a prime minister in British history. The next day, in the vote about no-confidence motion against the Conservative government initiated by the Labor Party, the Conservative Party saved its ruling position by 325 votes to 306. The British House of Commons rejected Theresa May’s draft of the Brexit deal, though, they still position her as prime minister. This suggests the lower house is pressing on Theresa May to make her take a tougher stance when renegotiating with the EU.

However, during the protracted process of Brexit, how to solve the "soft border" problem between Britain's Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is the core of negotiations. The "soft border" between Britain and Ireland, on the one hand, is concerned with the survival of the EU, which is the bottom line; on the other hand, it involves unification of the UK, which is the red line. Therefore, the Brexit negotiations are essentially a confrontation between the EU facing the crisis of survival and the UK facing a risk of splitting. The road to solve this problem is fraught with difficulties. Both the UK and the EU are trying to find a solution in such dilemma. 

“Soft border” is essential to the survival of the EU

The EU has been in a favorable position in the Brexit negotiations. After all, Britain does not want to lose the huge market of the EU ---- for Britain, nearly half of its trade is with the EU. In an advantageous position, the EU fully clarifies its bottom line in the draft of the Brexit deal which is rejected by the lower house of the British Parliament.

How the EU treats a "solo" country is the core issue in Brexit negotiations. From the EU's perspective, the EU member states and the "Brexit" countries must be different, otherwise the EU’s necessity and significance are threatened. The EU’s attitude towards Britain, this “disloyal” friend, is tough: the United Kingdom cannot just pick what it wants as arbitrarily as “picking cherries”. Four Freedoms of the EU are inseparable, that is, the UK cannot enjoy the free flow of goods while restricting the free flow of people. All negotiations between the EU and the UK are subjected to this principle.

The difficulty of the Brexit negotiations lies in the Northern Ireland border issue. From the perspective of the EU, the Northern Ireland border is the key to opening the door to the EU, and this key must be held in its own hands. The EU recognizes that the Northern Ireland border cannot transform from the existing "soft border" to the "hard border", but this is a fact that the EU is extremely unwilling to accept.

Since the establishment of the EU, although the internal boundary has been weakened along with the overall development trend of European integration, the external boundary remains rock-firm. However, once the UK leaves the EU, the “soft border” between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland will be destroying the outer wall of the EU. Once the wall is cracked, the whole world can seamlessly connect with the EU through the UK. The European single market, which was built by its member states with decades of ceaseless efforts, will be destroyed and the foundation of the EU’s survival will be eroded. This is the last scene the EU wants to see.

In order to maintain a “soft border” for the Northern Ireland, the EU proposed a backstop plan that is, if there is no trade agreement between Britain and the EU after the end of the transition period on December 31, 2020, the program will take effect. It will ensure that there is no customs between Northern Ireland and Ireland, there are no tariffs and quotas, and trade will also be the same as usual until the UK and Europe reached an agreement to guarantee the "soft border" of Northern Ireland.

In essence, this scheme is temporary. However, the EU believes before the United Kingdom reach an agreement on the Northern Ireland border issue, Northern Ireland must be included in EU’s own management, and the UK cannot unilaterally regulate or withdraw. This is the essence of the backstop plan, which is not only a reflection of the core demands of the EU but also the bottom line for the EU to secure its own survival.

The “backstop plan ” may split the UK

The British House of Commons’ veto on Theresa May’s draft Brexit deal suggests that it has touched the red line. In fact, many Britons are reluctant to leave the EU, but the minority must obey the majority. In the face of the fact that the UK is leaving the EU, the British must think about their future of British-European relations from the perspective of national interest, because many issues that were previously logical within the framework of the EU suddenly became a red line.

In overview, what the House of Commons cannot accept is the EU's backstop plan about Northern Ireland. The program does protect the interests of the EU, while there is also a potential risk of splitting the UK.

The problem between the UK and Ireland has been around for a long time, at least it preceded the EU. The Northern Ireland issue was a legacy of Ireland’s independence from Britain in 1922. With the joint efforts of the international community, Northern Ireland embarked on the path of peace with the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. In order to advance the peace process, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland gradually developed a "soft border". This practice was also in line with the development trend of the EU's softening of internal borders. The establishment of the Schengen area was a powerful testimony. From the perspective of the evolution of the relationship between Britain and Ireland and the development trend of the EU, the Northern Ireland problem has gradually become less important.

Britain’s Brexit suddenly raised the significance of the Northern Ireland problem because of a “hard border” between Britain and Europe. In the eyes of the United Kingdom, the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland cannot return to the “hard border” and peace in Northern Ireland must be maintained under existing condition. Changing these conditions may ruin the hard-won peace. In this sense, the UK and Europe have reached a consensus that Northern Ireland cannot return to the "hard border".

However, the protecting scheme about Northern Ireland, proposed by the EU to protect its own survival bottom line, touched the red line of Britain. In the eyes of the British, it is no doubt that this program will temporarily allow the EU to govern Northern Ireland. The Brexit will only result in Britain's departure from the EU, while Northern Ireland still remains in the EU system. This violates the original intention of the British "Brexit". Moreover, the short-lived “independent” status of Northern Ireland may also lead to the unification of the island of Ireland. If Northern Ireland has gained greater benefits and security within the EU, why should it remain in the United Kingdom? The future scenario outlined in this scheme has made most members of the lower house feel the danger of being split. In the debate before the voting on the draft Brexit deal, members of the House of Commons referred to the scheme as many as 472 times. Therefore, no matter how much the EU emphasizes that the backstop plan is only temporary, it is of no help, for the British will not lay this untimely bomb.

In fact, staying in the EU is the best solution for Britain, but to a great extent this road has been blocked. In fact, there is still a bottom-up solution, which is to get Ireland out of the EU. This will not only protect the interests of the EU, but also eliminate doubts of the UK. But the problem is that Ireland has not filed a "Brexit" application and the EU cannot oust it. So far, this road does not work as well.

The problem between the UK and Europe can only be solved by transcending the existing institutional framework. This requires the elites of both sides to create a unique relationship model that may bring life to the troubled EU and the anxious UK.

The author is an assistant research fellow at the Center for British Studies, Shanghai International Studies University (SISU).