When Lord Frost, the UK’s former Brexit minister, spoke at the Conservative Party conference in October, it was understandable that eyebrows were raised in Washington. Frost said the Northern Ireland protocol had “begun to come apart even faster than we feared” and that “significant change” was needed to the deal agreed before the pandemic that averted a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, a member of the EU. The protocol in effect created a unified customs area across the island of Ireland, and erected a regulatory barrier in the Irish Sea between Northern Ireland and Britain. But the agreement was always an unprecedented and difficult compromise that tried to reconcile the aims of protecting the EU single market with the successful protection of different strands of the Good Friday agreement. Both the UK and EU knew that more discussions were necessary. The text of the protocol makes clear that it is not a complete solution. London was never happy that the protocol carved one part of the UK off from the rest and placed it into a sphere where European customs law still reigned. It was unhappy with the European Court of Justice, an EU institution, remaining the court of last resort in any part of a country now legally independent of Brussels. The current implementation of the protocol is causing considerable disruption and instability in Northern Ireland. Some of these issues threaten not only the smooth functioning of the Northern Ireland economy and that of the republic, but also, possibly, the peace and stability that US policymakers wish to preserve. In its current form, the protocol has stifled trade and created serious logistical problems, including disruption and instability in Northern Ireland at a time of shortages across Europe. Businesses of all sizes have faced additional burdens. The UK government claims that more than 300 entry documents are in use for animal products traveling through Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Executive estimates that, from January to March last year, about 20 percent of the total customs checks carried out across the entire EU were conducted between Britain and Northern Ireland. The UK government has long argued that this is unsustainable. As has been the case throughout the five years since the UK voted to leave the EU, mutual accusations will be traded over coming weeks. Dr. Azeem Ibrahim Added to this is the debate, no less lively outside Europe, over whether Britain is living up to its international legal obligations, which the EU alleges it is ignoring. Britain has threatened to invoke article 16 of the protocol, “safeguard” measures that suspend parts of the deal, in order to protect economic and social interests in Northern Ireland — although when he was in office, Frost insisted negotiation was still possible. Allies of the EU abroad contend that this is unprecedented and a threat to the sanctity of treaties. They paint the UK as an unreliable partner and negotiator. For its part, the British government maintains that the protocol was a compromise by the UK, intended to protect the peace process in trying circumstances. It says that the government is “unshakable” in its commitment to the Good Friday agreement, and that the commitment has “framed every aspect of the government’s approach to Brexit negotiations around Northern Ireland and will continue to do so.” The government maintains that it will invoke article 16 only if the path taken by negotiations makes it unavoidable. This is likely to be a policy that survives Lord Frost. As has been the case throughout the five years since the UK voted to leave the EU, mutual accusations will be traded over coming weeks. Both the EU negotiators and the British have taken their cases to the media — and now, increasingly, on to Twitter — in a parallel negotiation for public and world opinion. But the parties have negotiated deals before, and have largely reached agreement. The Brexit agreement itself was considered lost many times. Red lines have been moved and reconstituted as necessity beckoned. And there is room for continuity as well as change. Large sections of the Northern Ireland protocol, objected to by no one, will remain — whatever the result of negotiation and regardless of who is doing the negotiating. With the Foreign Secretary Liz Truss now appointed to lead the negotiations, we are entering what may be the final stretch of the talks. The challenge confronting negotiators remains significant. But peace in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is in the interests of all. And so long as it remains that way, peace does not hang in the balance of negotiation. If all act in good faith, peace and prosperity can be preserved. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson will simply have to find another minister to lead that effort. Dr. Azeem Ibrahim is the Director of Special Initiatives at the Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy in Washington D.C. and author of “The Rohingyas: Inside Myanmar’s Genocide” (Hurst, 2017). Twitter: @AzeemIbrahim Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Arab News" point-of-view