Politically deniable

One of the key things that separates economics from more rigorous sciences such as physics and chemistry is the near-impossibility of conducting experiments in an effort to validate theories.  Economics happens in real time.  You can't re-run it under different assumptions to see what would have happened in some alternative universe.

As Brexit unfolds (unravels?) in the coming months and years, this will be significant.  Sure. leaving the EU is a huge development for the UK economy, but it's far from being the only factor that will affect the country's economic performance. Just at this moment, for example, coronavirus is almost certainly a bigger risk factor than Brexit, and who knows what other shocks the future may bring?  This means that even if the UK economy collapses into recession in 2022, it will never be possible to say definitively that a botched Brexit was the cause, though that won't stop Remainers from making that claim. Equally, if the UK economy booms in 2022, it won't be possible to assert that Brexit has been a boon, although again, that won't stop Brexiteers from crowing about it.

That's not particularly rigorous, but you could call it the scientific form of political deniability.  No matter how badly things may go, Boris Johnson and his pals will always be able to argue that the bad stuff was going to happen anyway: "Events, dear boy, events", as Johnson's predecessor Harold Macmillan (PM 1957-63) famously said when a reporter asked him what kept him awake at night.

That level of deniability will never be enough, of course. Johnson will need someone specific to blame if things go wrong, and he is already laying the groundwork. The scapegoat will, of course, be the EU itself.  Pro-Brexit sections of the UK media are already full of stories of how Johnson is "furious"with the EU for supposedly reneging on deals regarding trade and such that only really existed in the febrile recesses of his own mind.

The EU made it clear throughout the agonizing three years-plus of Brexit negotiations that the UK would never be allowed to cherry-pick the parts of the existing relationship that it liked and walk away from the rest while ceasing to contribute to the EU budget.  Yet cherry-picking exactly describes the UK's opening position ahead of the formal talks on future arrangements that are set to begin in March.  Not surprisingly, the EU is having none of this and is making its position understood in no uncertain terms.

This all suits Johnson well enough in the near term. Standing up to Johnny Foreigner plays well with the portions of the electorate that voted for Brexit. In the more-than-likely event that talking tough gets Johnson precisely nowhere and the UK reaches the end of the year without a deal, the back-and-forth yelling across the English Channel will allow Johnson to claim that the ensuing hard Brexit, with all the disastrous consequences that is likely to entail for the UK economy, was all the fault of Brussels.

This is not a foolproof strategy for Johnson.  If things go very seriously wrong and the UK manufacturing and financial sectors leave en masse for Europe, blaming it all on the EU may not be much of a vote winner, though of course with his huge Parliamentary majority, Johnson doesn't have to worry about that until 2024.

Still, it is remarkable to note how foolhardy the government's approach has been since its election victory.  It's not just the EU that Johnson is antagonizing. To take one big example, Johnson's  decision to allow Huawei to participate in the UK's 5G plans has infuriated the Trump administration. The new UK-US trade deal that Johnson touted back in the fall looks unlikely now: Trump's asinine trade guru Peter Navarro suggests that the UK is now second in line behind the EU in the pecking order for new trade deals.  That's got to hurt -- and there is no doubt a lot more to come in the months ahead.