Boris Johnson and Donald Trump

The United Kingdom’s landmark election victory by conservatives has not been a popular topic in the U.S. media.

However, a key, and significantly beneficial result of that tsunami against Great Britain’s leftist elite is very probably an extraordinary trade deal which will greatly benefit the economies of both nations. The solidly defeated Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party attempted to convince British voters that Johnson’s victory, which would inevitably lead to the U.K. leaving the European Union, would have negative financial implications. The move is expected to be completed by January 31, 2020. Many believe, however, that a London-Washington trade deal will more than offset any loss from Brexit.

President Trump was one of the first world leaders to congratulate Boris Johnson on his re-election. The American President promised to establish a massive new economic relationship with London, which the White House said has “the potential to be far bigger and more lucrative” than what the European Union could have provided.

In anticipation of Brexit, a working group had been established in 2017 to provide increased opportunities for U.K. and U.S. businesses, workers, and consumers as the UK leaves the European Union, and to With such diverse use of prescription cialis it treats prolonged ED issues with very gentle care. Yes it’s levitra without prescription difficult to match the intensity of youth when it comes to your sex life. This is true about everything, tadalafil 25mg including driving. We have an obligation to our veterans, to our deceased veterans, to their families, and to all evil doers who think they buying levitra from canada can kill the innocent with impunity. explore ways to dramatically strengthen trade and investment ties. Their work included laying the groundwork for a potential future free trade paradigm once the UK has formally exited the European Union. U.S. goods and services trade with United Kingdom totaled an estimated $235.9 billion in 2017. Exports were $125.9 billion; imports were $110.0 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade surplus with United Kingdom was $15.9 billion in that same year.

The Wall Street Journal noted the significance of the likely arrangement: “…the potential is enormous and stretches far beyond the U.S.-U.K. special relationship. A comprehensive post-Brexit trade deal could invigorate both economies. It’s also a chance to re-energize a beleaguered global trading system by showing that market-opening deals still are possible.”

There are significant obstacles to be overcome, in areas such as drug pricing, food safety/labelling, and environmental issues. None, however, appear to be an impossible barrier for transatlantic negotiators, particularly since personal relations between Boris Johnson and Donald Trump appear to be on solid footing. A Gatestone Institute study reports that “…there are already early signs that [Johnson’s] premiership will preside over a dramatic revival in transatlantic relations not seen since the heyday of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.”

Some have speculated that a U.S.-U.K. deal could lead to something even larger: a wider pact among English-speaking nations, a concept known as “The Anglosphere.” Graham Leech, in a Cityam study, writes that

“…there are five reasons why the Anglosphere could make geostrategic sense: First is economic exceptionalism. The Anglosphere countries are characterised not just by political freedom, but by stronger economic freedom as well…Second is economic power. The core five Anglosphere economies (the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) accounted for 33 per cent of global GDP…Third is soft power. The US and the UK rank first and second in the Portland 30 Index of Global Soft Power, but Canada and Australia are also in the top 10. The Anglosphere countries dominate movies, TV, books and news media, helping to forge a shared identity. Anglosphere brands also dominate global commerce, particularly in the information economy. Fourth is hard power. The Anglosphere countries tend to spend more money on defence as a proportion of GDP. Fifth is the English language. English language usage is in the ascendance. According to the British Council, English is spoken at a useful level by 1.75bn people and this is set to rise to 2bn by 2020. English is likely to be the dominant international language of the twenty-first century, and it is already the lingua franca of academia.”

Illustration: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.