Members of the colour party march in 2023 (Charles McQuillan/Getty Images)

Northern Ireland’s unionists have agreed to do what the Conservatives could not: pay the price for Brexit. The magnitude of this moment should not be underestimated, but nor should it be particularly celebrated. Right or wrong, the DUP’s decision to resume power-sharing after two years of protest at the Government’s original Brexit agreement marks the culmination of a long, grubby process from which almost no-one — save perhaps Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader — emerges with much credit.
For most people, the idea that the DUP deserves any credit will come as something of a surprise. The standard interpretation of the past few years is that the DUP brought this settlement on themselves: they backed Brexit and must now swallow a sea border with Britain as a result. The reality few are willing to face, however, is that ever since the Brexit vote, the fate of Northern Ireland has been, at best, a secondary consideration for almost every actor in this distasteful drama.
Far from the DUP being to blame, every side — and I mean every side — has acted appallingly, including the Irish government and the European Commission. As such, the conclusion is not some grand settlement of which we can all be proud — but a tense, uneasy armistice which will have to be nurtured carefully over the coming years if it is not to wither and die. Perhaps the real tragedy is that it is still the best we could have hoped for.
Essentially, Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” remains in place, though with added ameliorations to make it less noticeable. The DUP finally decided to accept this deal because, quite simply, there were no good alternatives left: it was Sunak’s deal with devolution, or Sunak’s deal without devolution. There was no option in which the Windsor framework was not part of the package.
Some loyalists in Northern Ireland would prefer to maintain a principled opposition to any divergence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland — in the hope that, eventually, a future government will have to renegotiate it. The reality, though, is this is a very long game. The prospect of a British prime minister unilaterally abandoning its agreement with the EU ended with the removals of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss.
And yet, here’s the great paradox: what we have today is Boris Johnson’s Brexit settlement, endorsed by all those who opposed and continue to loathe everything that Boris Johnson stood for. When push came to shove, Parliament overwhelmingly rejected Theresa May’s proposed Brexit settlement, in which Great Britain paid a higher price in sovereignty to reduce (but not remove) the Irish sea border. Instead, it endorsed Johnson’s alternative, in which the UK retains far more freedom to act independently of the EU at the cost of a harder sea border. Sunak’s achievement in office has been to negotiate — and, now, impose — various ameliorations to this Johnsonian settlement, to make it more palatable to unionism. But still, the settlement is Johnson’s, backed by both the Conservative and Labour parties.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe