- British Prime Minister Boris Johnson agreed to a new Brexit deal with the European Union on Thursday.
- The deal would get rid of the contentious Irish backstop, but it would create a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K.
- Johnson is expected to hold a vote on the deal in British Parliament on Saturday, but both opposition Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn and the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland oppose it.
- If the deal fails, Johnson will likely need to go back to the EU and ask for an extension to the U.K.’s current Oct. 31 Brexit deadline.
Johnson and EU Agree to a New Deal
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson agreed to a new Brexit deal with the European Union Thursday, which notably removes the Irish backstop but adds a controversial Northern Irish-only backstop.
“We’ve got a great new deal that takes back control,” Johnson said on Twitter. “Now Parliament should get Brexit done on Saturday so we can move on to other priorities like the cost of living, the NHS, violent crime and our environment.”
The new deal comes after Johnson said he would negotiate a better deal than the EU offered former prime minister Theresa May. however, the EU previously said it wouldn’t negotiate a different deal.
Notably, removing the United Kingdom from the EU has been one of Johnson’s major promises, and he originally said that would happen by the current Oct. 31 deadline with or without a deal.
What’s in the New Brexit Deal?
The new deal provides several key provisions that Johnson hopes will pass parliament’s scrutiny. First and most notably, the deal scraps the massively contentious Irish backstop.
The United Kingdom is composed of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The controversy surrounding the backstop specifically deals with Northern Ireland, which is on the same island as the independent Republic of Ireland.
Right now, there is no hard border between those two countries, meaning there are no customs checks for goods crossing between the border. Under May’s deal, that soft border would have remained, but this was actually one of the big reasons her deal failed three times in parliament. Members of parliament believed this backstop would have essentially kept the UK in the EU.
Second, the new deal creates a new Northern Ireland-only backstop, which can become confusing since Northern Ireland is part of the U.K. Basically, the deal sets up a special arrangement where Northern Ireland would still remain subject to certain EU regulations, including agriculture, value-added tax on goods, excise duties, and state aid rules.
That, in turn, would prevent a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, but it would result in a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K., meaning that there would be customs checks and different regulations between the two which could lead to additional trade costs for the U.K.
Another caveat to the deal would also eventually give Northern Ireland lawmakers the chance to decide on whether or not they want to stay so closely aligned with the EU in the future.
Third, while the U.K. would leave the EU, it would still continue to apply EU rules until the end of next year. That time will be seen as a transition period meant to soften the split, especially since the deal does not look to the future relationship between the U.K. and the EU.
The period is meant to give them time to work out a trade deal, among other provisions, and it could be extended by up to two years if both sides agree they need more time. As far as May’s deal, this aspect is similar to her agreement.
Unlike May’s deal, this deal is non-binding, meaning the EU has the ability to change its mind.
Will the Deal Pass?
One of the major questions following the announcement of the agreement was whether or not the bill can stand against a parliament that has rejected Brexit votes multiple times.
The removal of the Irish backstop is expected to be a sticking point for a lot of pro-Brexit Conservative MP’s, and a few opposition Labour Party MPs have expressed support.
Johnson is expected to vote on the deal on Saturday, and if it does pass, the U.K. could actually meet its end of the month deadline.
But, it’s not going to be that easy. Many MPs from other parties have already said they will refuse to back the deal.
“From what we know, it seems the Prime Minister has negotiated an even worse deal than Theresa May’s,” Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn said.
The Liberal Democrats have also said they are opposed to the deal and have echoed Corbyn’s call for a second referendum as to whether the U.K. should even leave the EU. Brexit Party Leader Nigel Farage said he’s not voting for the deal, either.
If that’s not enough, the pro-British Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland issued their opposition to the deal, as well. That could make or break the deal’s passage as the DUP is a key ally for Johnson.
“These proposals are not, in our view, beneficial to the economic well-being of Northern Ireland and they undermine the integrity of the Union,” the party’s statement reads.
Specifically, the party is not happy with Northern Ireland functioning as a hard border between the EU and the rest of the U.K.
Johnson’s deal, however, has been well-received outside of Britain among leaders of other EU countries. The President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker, Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, and France’s President Emmanuel Macron all expressed support for the deal and moving it forward.
Leo Varadkar, Prime Minister of Ireland, also agreed the deal was fair and said the deal solves the issue with Northern Ireland.
“[It] also creates a unique solution for Northern Ireland recognising the unique history and geography of Northern Ireland, one which ensures there is no hard border between north and south,” he said.
If the deal ultimately passes through British Parliament, it will need to be approved by EU leaders in the European Parliament to bind them to the agreement.
If the deal fails, Johnson will be forced to ask the EU for an extension until the end of January. Though there’s been a lot of concern over whether he would actually do that, a secretary for Johnson has now said he will comply with the law.
See what others are saying: (Business Insider) (Washington Post) (The Guardian)
Russia Orders Social Media Sites To Block Calls for Navalny Protests
- Shortly after his arrest on Sunday, Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny called for protests to take place on Jan. 23 and was met with a wave of support online.
- In response, the government ordered tech giants like Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, TikTok, and Russian-centric VK to “block all publications with calls to demonstrate on the 23rd.”
- TikTok has already deleted 38% of posts with such calls while VK and YouTube have deleted 50%, and Instagram has removed 17%.
Navalny Calls for Protests
Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny’s return to Russia and subsequent arrest earlier this week has set off a chain of events in the country.
Since his arrest, Navalny has called for protests to occur on Jan. 23. Now, Russian authorities are taking precautions and arresting his allies in an effort to slow down the momentum of the looming demonstrations. Among their many demands are that Navalny be released.
Throughout the week, thousands of posts shared by younger Russians have raged across social media asking that people partake in the protests. The reach of those posts, however, have been curtailed by the government.
Social media tech giants like Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, TikTok, and the Russian-centric VK were ordered by the Russian government to “block all publications with calls to demonstrate on the 23rd.”
Roskomnadzor, the Russian communications watchdog, later stated, “Internet sites will be brought to administrative responsibility in connection with the dissemination of information prohibited by law and aimed at attracting minors to participate in unauthorized mass public events.”
“Participation in such events is in violation of the established procedure, including in a pandemic, and carries risks of harm to life and health,” it added.
Censorship Payoff Unknown
For many of the sites, which are often seen as a way to promote free speech in regimes that are far more restrictive, the order puts them in an awkward position. Still, many have already complied, at least to some extend.
According to Roskomnadzor, Tiktok has deleted 38% of videos calling for minors to attend the protests. VK and YouTube have both deleted 50% of similar posts, while Instagram has removed 17% of posts that violate the regulations.
It’s unclear to what extent this censorship will have on stopping Russians from attending tomorrow’s protests; however, some of the nation’s largest protests in modern history have been organized by Navalny.
See what others are saying: (Moscow Times) (Associated Press) (Reuters)
Accusations Against Chinese Actress Shine Light on the Nation’s Surrogacy Laws
- Chinese actress Zheng Shuang is facing major backlash after her former partner, Zhang Heng, accused her of abandoning her two children born through U.S.-based surrogates.
- Beyond public outcry and losing brand deals, Zheng is likely facing legal consequences after a Chinese government agency said that using a legal loophole to obtain a surrogate from abroad was “definitely not innocent.”
- Zheng denies the claims and hasn’t confirmed if the children are actually hers, although she’s listed as their mother on their birth certificates.
- As for the children in question, Zhang has been taking care of them in the U.S.
American-Based Surrogacy Cause Controversy
Chinese social media users have launched into debates surrounding how the rich and elite circumvent domestic laws in order to obtain surrogate services.
The latest controversy is surrounding actress Zheng Shuang. Though she has never confirmed this publicly, Zheng allegedly went to the U.S. with her-now-ex Zhang Heng and had two children with the help of American surrogates. However, on Monday, Zhang accused Zheng of abandoning the children and leaving him to take care of them in the U.S. The couple reportedly broke up before the babies were born due to Zhang’s alleged infidelity.
According to the South China Morning Post, Zhang’s friend released a voice recording on the Chinese platform NetEase Entertainment. In it, Zhang and Zheng are allegedly having a discussion with their parents over what to do with the then-unborn children. Zheng’s father suggested that they abandon the children at the hospital, while Zheng reportedly expressed annoyance that they could not be aborted so late in pregnancy.
Legal Grey Zone Likely Won’t Help
Beyond public outcries, Zheng lost a recent brand deal with Prada that she signed just eight days before the accusations were made. Additionally, other brand partners, such as Aussie, have distanced themselves from the actress. She also faces multiple awards she has won being revoked as well as potential legal consequences.
Currently, surrogacy is illegal in China; however, the laws have a legal grey zone. Technically, providing surrogacy is what is illegal, but obtaining one from abroad is not explicitly mentioned, even if it goes against the spirit of the law.
The Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission of the Communist Party commented on the situation in a Weibo video post, saying that using this legal loophole to get a surrogacy was “definitely not innocent.”
“Surrogacy is banned in China as it uses women’s uteruses as a tool and sells life as a commercial product.,” it continued. “As a Chinese citizen, the act of traveling to the US on a legal loophole is not abiding the law.”
Following the post, companies like Blued, a gay dating app in China, took down sections of their apps that helped users set up services with surrogacy firms overseas.
Surrogacy is a controversial subject in China, with many actors and actresses obtaining them overseas, but many social media users across the country are against the practice. Officially, the government claims that it “overlooks life” and “tramples the bottom line [of human morality].“
Zheng has denied claims that she abandoned any children, and has never confirmed whether or not she actually has any, although she is listed as the mother on the children’s birth certificates.
As for the children in question, even though Zheng’s father suggested abandoning them in the hospital, her ex has been taking care of them in the U.S.
See What Others Are Saying: (South China Morning Post) (Straits Times) (New York Times)
American Influencer Kristen Gray To Be Deported From Bali
- In a viral Twitter thread, influencer Kristen Gray encouraged people to move to Bali like she did while promoting her eBook and other resources on how to do so amid COVID-19 restrictions.
- Many criticized her for encouraging an influx of travelers during the pandemic. She also sparked conversations about gentrification and was slammed for falsely characterizing Indonesia as queer-friendly.
- The local government promised to deport her Tuesday, arguing that selling her book and offering paid consultations on traveling to Bali violated the purpose of her visitor stay permit. They also say she was “spreading information that could unsettle the public.”
- “I am not guilty. I have not overstayed my visa. I have not made money in Indonesian rupiah in Indonesia,” Gray told reporters. “I put out a statement about LGBT and I am being deported because of LGBT.”
Kristen Gray Goes Viral
Officials in Indonesia said Tuesday that they will deport Kristen Gray, an American influencer who has caused international outrage in the last week.
Gray moved to Bali with her girlfriend in 2019 with plans to stay for six months. In reality, the couple ended up staying much longer because of the coronavirus pandemic, and in a viral Twitter thread, Gray shared how positive their experience has been.
Gray pointed to several benefits of moving to Bali in her posts, like its safety, low cost of living, luxury lifestyle, as well as its queer-friendly and Black communities.
She also encouraged others to make the same move and promoted their $30 eBook “Our Bali Life Is Yours” for tips on how to do it. “We include direct links to our visa agents and how to go about getting to Indonesia during COVID,” she even wrote in one post.
The thread sparked outrage for encouraging an influx of travelers to a country that has closed its borders over the worsening pandemic. On top of that, it sparked conversations about the gentrification of neighborhoods there.
Bali is a major tourist destination for Americans, Europeans, and Australians in particular, and like areas all over the world, it has suffered from the loss in visitors this year.
However, many online noted that locals have been steadily priced out of certain areas of the island as foreigners open businesses to cater to tourists. Others argue that poorly regulated development is also destroying industries that Balinese people have historically relied on.
Aside from those criticisms, many people also took issue with Gray characterizing Bali as a queer-friendly when the reality for locals is far different.
“It well may be the case for you. However, please recognize that it is because a) you’re a foreigner and b) you have economic leverage since the Indonesian local community is financially dependent on keeping you happy so they don’t mess with you,” a user named Kai Mata said in a viral TikTok.
“Please realize for the rest of us Indonesians on the island, this is not a queer-friendly place. Our gay communities are often shut down and raided by authorities and Indonesia at large has tried to mandate conversion therapy for us the LGBTQ+ Community.“
The local government responded to the public outrage over Gray’s thread Tuesday. In a statement, it said selling her book and also offering paid consultations on traveling to Bali violated the purpose of her visitor stay permit, which was valid until January 24.
Gray was also accused of “spreading information that could unsettle the public” by saying Bali is queer-friendly and suggesting foreigners travel there during the pandemic.
According to Reuters, she was being held at an immigration detention facility Tuesday and was to be deported as soon as a flight was available.
In a brief statement to the Balinese press, Gray defended herself. “I am not guilty. I have not overstayed my visa. I have not made money in Indonesian rupiah in Indonesia. I put out a statement about LGBT and I am being deported because of LGBT,” she explained.
Many of her fans believe her and also argue that she is seeing this level of criticism because she is a Black woman.