Amid the fantasies and delusions of a contest that brings shame on the Conservative Party, the key figure may be emerging. While attention is fixed on the committee rooms of Westminster and supporters of Boris Johnson (take a bow, James Cleverly) who write supportive articles with no mention of the words “European”, “Union” or “Brexit”, do not lose sight of the real leader of Europe. The clowns in a minefield of British politics may have less say over our destiny than the president of France, who is starting to tire of our juvenile floor-show.
The identity of our next prime minister may not matter as much as the locked nature of Brexit. According to worrying whispers in Paris, President Macron has come to the conclusion that Britain cannot escape from the trap it has put itself in, no matter who makes it to Downing Street. Mr Macron, who is no stranger to the idea that he could be a man of destiny, thinks he may be the man to spring that trap.
Though this analysis applies to any victor, there is no doubt that the prospect of Mr Johnson in Downing Street will not be welcomed in Paris. This view of the Tory frontrunner was summed up in Le Monde on Wednesday. In an excoriating editorial, the newspaper poured scorn on Mr Johnson’s jingoism and described him as “a tinpot Trump”. His premiership would be “a calamity for his country and for Europe”. Mr Johnson’s playing-to-the-gallery threat to withhold the £39 billion Brexit bill agreed by Theresa May was described as “a decision with incalculable consequences, since it would taint the international credibility of a country that claims to be the champion of the rule of law”.
The top table of European bureaucrats is changing as Donald Tusk and Jean-Claude Juncker reach the end of their terms. Angela Merkel is not long for this political world. The British are faffing around without a clue, so keep an eye on Mr Macron, the only person showing any sign of having one.
Boris Johnson’s commanding lead in the first round of voting by Tory MPs shows that the party has lost the capacity to think calmly. At every stage in this saga, the Conservatives have chosen to polarise the issue. By refusing to countenance the soft departure of Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement, the Tory right is holding moderate people to ransom. Their intemperate politics will culminate in the anointing of a leader who further polarises opinion. A new prime minister usually gets a honeymoon of goodwill. Mr Johnson, if it is him, will not. British politics is about to experience a clash between two incompatible views of the world. Mr Johnson, who holds both views depending on how the mood takes him, will be cast as warrior-in-chief for a cause he barely believes.
This week he promised that, if he becomes prime minister, he will seek another deal from the EU. On what basis? To reopen the withdrawal agreement? To abolish the backstop? Insert a time limit? How?
Any reasonable observer can only surmise that Mr Johnson is, in truth, intent on taking Britain out of the EU without a deal. He knows he cannot negotiate a new deal in the time available and he knows there is no deal that can win over both wings of the party. So he will presumably go through the motions, blame the EU 27 for their intransigence and then dare parliament to block his path to no deal on October 31.
Whenever this prospect is raised, there is talk of complex constitutional chicanery that will enable parliament to take back control. Sir Oliver Letwin, the chief of chicanery, said yesterday that, after the defeat of his motion to hand control from the executive to parliament, he cannot think of another way.
There is a Micawberish sense among MPs that something will turn up at the last minute to ensure that no deal cannot happen. Some are even considering trying to bring down the government in a vote of no confidence, if that becomes the only way to prevent no deal taking place. But are there enough Conservative backbenchers prepared to follow Dominic Grieve in taking such a career-ending step?
This high-wire talk may all prove to be irrelevant because it rests on the assumption that Britain can extend its unhappy membership of the EU indefinitely. Mr Johnson appears to be sincere when he says that he will not, as prime minister, seek an extension to Britain’s membership after October 31. His opponents in parliament believe that, if they were able to form a government capable of requesting it, a further extension would be granted. Yet if the loose talk in France is to be believed, that may not be a safe assumption.
Mr Macron is, without question, irritated to the point of impatience with the perfidious British. His emissaries are telling British diplomats that they cannot expect the French to keep the UK in the European club for much longer.
At some point we actually have to do something and Mr Macron is tempted to force the issue. French public opinion would hardly cavil at a glorious expression of Gaullism in which he called time on the annoying British and effectively expelled us from the EU. You can see both the motivation and the temptation. You can see too how this could get Mr Johnson off the hook he has made for himself. A no-deal departure that was all the fault of the French while he was seeking (unachievable) compromise might be the perfect outcome to dangle before Tory Brexit obsessives.
Perhaps Mr Macron’s private rhetoric is running ahead of his real intentions. Wise heads who know Paris, Berlin and Brussels well suggest that, though he is certainly talking tough, the French president will yield, in the end, to German reluctance to allow its industrial base to suffer the knock-on damage a British no-deal exit would cause.
This may be one of the ironies of Brexit. Cavalier about the future of our own industries, we may be thankful that Germany at least has a patriotic government.
In the absurdist drama of Brexit, everything is unlikely. The prospect of France putting a stop to British stupidity is more likely than it might at first appear. Indeed it may be the only way out of the imbroglio. Certainly nothing that has yet been said in the Conservative leadership contest has had the clarity or realism of the increasing irritation expressed in private in Paris.
