Vtgyjfy

If Trump were involved with Brexit, would he insist on a hard infrastructure (a wall perhaps) on the Irish border? One senses that in his way of thinking it would be the only way of keeping out illegal immigrants.

Paradoxically it is Trump's acolytes in the UK - the hard right populists and Brexiteers - who are moving heaven and earth trying to persuade the Government and the electorate that in the event of "no deal", no border of any kind would be required.

Presumably the Owen Patersons and Ian Duncan Smiths of this world think Trump is talking hot air, as regards the wall. Would they care to speak up and confirm this?

Edit (17.51hrs GMT 4 Jan 2019).

Almost all responders and commenters so far have missed the point to the question. It concerns the putative deal which Theresa May is to do with the EU concerning the UK's withdrawal from the EU.

Almost everyone in the UK agrees that it is undesirable for there to be a "hard border" between Northern Ireland and the ROI. (This has to do with the history of "the troubles") However the "deal" would provide that in the event that the UK and the EU had not reached agreement on a trade deal by 31 Dec 2020, that the UK mainland would remain in the Customs Union, and Northern Ireland (only) in the Single Market. Failing agreement on that there would have to be a "hard border" in Ireland to administer customs duties, and migration.

Equally if the UK crashes out in March with "no deal", there will be no transition period and this will immediately give rise to the need for a hard border.

Now, the Brexiteer wing of the Tory party - the kind of people who are, in most other respects, of the Trump mentality - argue that a hard border would be unnecessary - that all movements could be tracked electronically. So what I am asking is why they don't tell Trump that he doesn't need a wall. Surely all these migrants can be tracked "electronically", can't they?

Populists assign blame for all your problems to some group, typically one without a voice to counter their claims. In the US that is immigrants, particularly from South America. In the UK it's the EU, specifically the institution, and migrants from eastern Europe.

So in the UK there is no need for a wall to keep Irish people out. In fact, since the Irish border issue jeopardises the whole thing, it's vitally important that it is resolved, and since no-one wants a hard border and the existence of one would likely harm the UK and may even lead to a break up of the union (with Northern Ireland leaving), they do not desire a wall.

Neither side want a border there at all. They just disagree as to how many countries should exist on the British Isles. If you asked someone from the UK if they need a wall to keep people out, they might laugh, and say "We already have a moat"

The extreme of one side want an independant Ireland to be the whole of one island, and don't care about the other islands.

The extreme of the other side want everything to be one country. In living memory it was.

Note that "Trump's acolytes in the UK" is a misnomer. There are UK politicians who have similar political opinions to US politicians, but "acolyte" implies working for an overlord.

I doubt Trump would advocate for spending piles of money on something no-one wants. From appearences, he is not personally against migration, legal or otherwise, but recognises that it can be politically useful to describe Mexico -> USA immigration as "a problem that needs a big solution".

Now he might say "Oh we will soon have some wall building experience, we can help you with this", but the audience for that statement is US people who want the Mexico wall, and presumably don't care about the exact situation being described. Saying things like that doesn't mean he thinks building a wall in Ireland is a good idea.