BoJo refuses to give full diplomatic status to EU ambassador

[vetran]

If the UK Government refuses to acknowledge the EU Ambassador to the UK because the EU is not a sovereign state but DOES recognise that Ambassadors from EU Member states are sent from Sovereign Nations then why was it suggested that the UK had lost its sovereignty when we were EU members and we had to leave the EU to gain our Sovereignty back?

You realise this is a new type of post? They are discussing whether the UK follow the current law or change it. It seems 142 other countries decided to ignore the law or at least interpret it differently.

UK and EU in row over bloc'''s diplomatic status - BBC News

The Foreign Office is insisting he and his officials should not have the privileges and immunities afforded to diplomats under the Vienna Convention.It is understood not to want to set a precedent by treating an international body in the same way as a nation state.


As it stands, the ambassador would not have the chance to present his credentials to the Queen like other diplomatic heads of mission.



The British decision is in marked contrast to 142 other countries around the world where the EU has delegations and where its ambassadors are all granted the same status as diplomats representing sovereign nations.

The EU argues it is not a typical international organisation because it has its own currency, judicial system and the power to make law.
In his letter to Mr Raab last November, seen by the BBC, Mr Borrell says: "Your service have sent us a draft proposal for an establishment agreement about which we have serious concerns.

The EU want to play on our golf course and don't want to follow the rules, how dare they. I wonder why the thicko remoaners have difficulty with such a simple concept.

[vetran]

One would have thought it would be more logical for Brexiteers to recognise EU ambassador but refuse to recognise all member states ambassadors on the basis that EUSSR is an Evil State where Members got no rights.

Well as the international treaties say we have to recognise them unlike the EU we try to follow the law.

I assume once the EU takes over the diplomatic duties for members there will be some empty embassies.

[AtW]

Well as the international treaties say we have to recognise them unlike the EU we try to follow the law.

Following the law apart from those times when it can be broken in a “limited and specific way”?

[Mordac]

If the UK Government refuses to acknowledge the EU Ambassador to the UK because the EU is not a sovereign state but DOES recognise that Ambassadors from EU Member states are sent from Sovereign Nations then why was it suggested that the UK had lost its sovereignty when we were EU members and we had to leave the EU to gain our Sovereignty back?

You're missing the point here. The EU thinks of itself as a nation state (it is in all but name in fact) and by having a diplomatic relationship with three-quarters of the world means there won't be much of a fuss* when they declare the EU to be the sovereign government in all matters over all members. We can debate when that will happen, but not whether it will (they are about 80% of the way there now). Brexit will probably turn out to accelerate the process, since members who do not accept EU supremacy will be told that they can leave, but they will have all the difficulties imposed on the UK, plus they would have to extricate themselves from the Euro.

*Except when 450 million people suddenly realise they no longer get to vote for their national government, assuming they actually care.

[vetran]

You're missing the point here. The EU thinks of itself as a nation state (it is in all but name in fact) and by having a diplomatic relationship with three-quarters of the world means there won't be much of a fuss* when they declare the EU to be the sovereign government in all matters over all members. We can debate when that will happen, but not whether it will (they are about 80% of the way there now). Brexit will probably turn out to accelerate the process, since members who do not accept EU supremacy will be told that they can leave, but they will have all the difficulties imposed on the UK, plus they would have to extricate themselves from the Euro.

*Except when 450 million people suddenly realise they no longer get to vote for their national government, assuming they actually care.

The EU loves them, they love the EU they won't cotton on until they realise the EU is a vengeful God.

[NotAllThere]

An admission that the EU is actually a nation state in-waiting?

Only to people who have no understanding of how the international diplomatic system works. But, you know, there's a straw - try to get a grip on it.

[NotAllThere]

You're missing the point here. The EU thinks of itself as a nation state (it is in all but name in fact) and by having a diplomatic relationship with three-quarters of the world means there won't be much of a fuss* when they declare the EU to be the sovereign government in all matters over all members. We can debate when that will happen, but not whether it will (they are about 80% of the way there now). Brexit will probably turn out to accelerate the process, since members who do not accept EU supremacy will be told that they can leave, but they will have all the difficulties imposed on the UK, plus they would have to extricate themselves from the Euro.

*Except when 450 million people suddenly realise they no longer get to vote for their national government, assuming they actually care.

The EU loves them, they love the EU they won't cotton on until they realise the EU is a vengeful God.

Sheesh. You're making me blush. Get a room!

[vetran]

Only to people who have no understanding of how the international diplomatic system works. But, you know, there's a straw - try to get a grip on it.

Well to get full rights as an ambassador you need to be a nation state and the EU want full rights they need to be a nation state or the UK needs to change its mind. You can't expect to insist we treat you in a certain way if it is illegal, we aren't AtW's squirrels!

[xoggoth]

Shouldn't it be either ambassadors from individual nations OR an EU ambassador? It isn't usual for national groups to have ambassadors. Don't think we have NATO, UN etc ambassadors do we?

Maybe it's not that important provided the individual EU nations are happy with the EU "ambassador" acting on their behalf but doubt it will be that simple. Will Hungary or Poland be happy with it?

PS Just realised MuckyLady said much the same thing earlier.

[vetran]

Shouldn't it be either ambassadors from individual nations OR an EU ambassador? It isn't usual for national groups to have ambassadors. Don't think we have NATO, UN etc ambassadors do we?

Maybe it's not that important provided the individual EU nations are happy with the EU "ambassador" acting on their behalf but doubt it will be that simple. Will Hungary or Poland be happy with it?

PS Just realised MuckyLady said much the same thing earlier.

Nah it seems to be You will do as you are told, sound familiar?