The UK is smaller than the EU, sure, but it is not a minnow: major economy, major defence actor, major diplomatic power. The EU27, whether they know it or not, are facing a generation-determining choice about what sort of relationship they want with the UK. /1

That’s not mainly about trade. An amicable trade deal now could be the building block for a rebuilt web of relationships between sovereign equals that could largely preserve the substance of the current, non-trade status quo. If the EU want that. Do they know if they want it? /2

The UK, paradoxically, is differently placed. While the EU have to decide what sort of relationship they want with the UK, the UK is deciding whether we want any relationship with the EU. There are options. Take the hit on trade and a series of geopolitical choices open up. /3

The EU seems to think that a no-deal end to the transition merely leads to a deal on their terms by another route, because there will be a hit to UK trade and they can apply hostile pressure in that environment. So they get a second chance. /4

But that is a huge bet on the UK’s having no geopolitical options. My view is there is no second chance. The EU needs to start thinking geopolitically (as this Commission said it would) and understand the very wide implications for them that no deal implies. /5

My personal view is that the better outcome is a modest trade deal now, fully respecting UK sovereignty,not for its economic value (small), but because it preserves the possibility of the UK continuing a geopolitical partnership with a like-minded democratic neighbour. /6

But that won’t happen at the cost of impairing UK sovereignty. From the British point of view, re-establishing sovereignty, not trade as such, is what these talks have been all about. I hope the EU gets to see that before time runs out. As I say, a second chance is unlikely. /end