I doubt that NATO will survive

I NOTE that three Brexiteers were making their points on your letter page ( Echo April 12).

Len Monk asserts that “Seventeen million voters can’t be wrong”.

Why then are the twentynine million who did not vote to leave the European Union wrong?

We will only find out which group is correct over the next decade when the consequences of leaving become a reality.

G. Cripps quite correctly states that “Peace has been protected by NATO, not the EU”. Unfortunately, what applied in the past may not apply in the future.

The UK government, ably supported by arch Brexiteer Bill Cash, have used their influence to oppose the creation of a European Army, which this country has always seen as a threat to NATO.

In March, Jean-Claude Juncker set out a vision for stronger military co-operation between EU nations following Brexit. He suggests a European defence union in which member states will ‘pool’ military resources and buy equipment together.

Donald Trump (until his recent bombing of Syria) was describing NATO as redundant. There has therefore to be a question mark over the commitment of the USA to the organisation.

Without the influence of the UK, as a member of the EU and partner of the USA, using its diplomatic skills to hold NATO together, I doubt that it will survive for many more years. Such an outcome will be very problematic for us if we are outside both power blocks.

Richard Sanders suggests “it would be good if those doom mongers had a period of silence or even better supported our negotiations in the coming months as they get the best deal for the country”.

Could I suggest that the opposite is true. The EU negotiators’ prime objective will be political, to ensure that we are no better off out than in, so that no other members will be tempted to approach the exit.

Their secondary objective will be to ensure that the EU comes away with an agree- ment that does the least economic harm to that organisation.

Any trade deal taking us out of the present arrangements will incur a cost to both sides.

Due to the EU population being ten time larger than that of the UK, the economic penalty of any reduction in trade will cost UK subjects ten times as much per head as EU citizens.

So the EU is in a much stronger position to play “hard ball”. If we start our negotiations boasting about how great life outside the EU will be, the political imperative on the EU negotiators will be to drive a hard bargain.

However if the “doom mongers” receive plenty of publicity in the EU, making clear the high political and economic costs we will incur (with or without a good trade deal) the EU negotiators are more likely to concentrate on achieving an optimal solution which will be to the benefit of both the EU and UK.

John Catt