Some Congress leaders have usefully pointed out the cost of a no-deal Brexit for Northern Ireland. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sounded the alarm last April when she and several colleagues visited London, Dublin and Belfast to warn that Congress would support a US-British non-member. A trade deal that hurt the peace process.30 The co-chairs of the Friends of Ireland house caucus, MPs Richard Neal and Peter King, made a similar promise between the parties.31 The debate in Congress took on a more partisan tone in the letter from Senator Tom Cotton and 43 Fellow Republicans to Prime Minister Johnson, who advocated a trade deal “regardless of how Brexit happens.” 32 While the rejection of the backstop is politically understandable, a dissolution of the Good Friday Agreement is unacceptable. The agreement brings with it the opportunity for the Northern Province to express the desire to join the Republic of Ireland and constitutes a “binding commitment for both governments to introduce and support laws in their respective parliaments to give repercussions to this desire”. The only way to know what those wishes are today would be to ask the citizens of Northern Ireland. A more recent and, in some respects, similar case shows that this makes political sense. A number of bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements have made product controls less intrusive; The completion of the European internal market in 1992 led to a gradual deterioration of physical controls. However, during the unrest in Northern Ireland, there were British military checkpoints at the main border crossing points, and British security forces made some, but not all, of the remaining crossing points impassable. In 2005, the last border checkpoint was lifted in the implementation phase of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.  A recent poll shows that “55% of respondents [in Northern Ireland] would certainly or probably support a united Ireland if the UK left without a deal, this proportion drops to 48% if the UK leaves under the Withdrawal Agreement and only 29% if the UK remains in the EU”. Whatever the outcome of an actual vote, it at least suggests that the historic divisions may be less important to Northern Irish voters than the threat of a hard Brexit. If “this House is interested in preserving our Union, it must listen to these people, because our Union will only exist with their consent,” May said. As DUP MP Paul Girvan said in the December debate, “what was not achieved by armed nationalists during the conflict was achieved by bureaucrats in Europe with a pen.” 5 McLoughlin, P.
J. (with D. Phinnemore, L. McGowan, L., and C. McCall), “Northern Ireland â€“ 40 Years of EU Membership,” Journal of Contemporary European Research, 8:4, 2012; pp. 563-70. It offered a balanced arrangement with full recognition of the principle of consent to obtain the constitutional status of Northern Ireland, a partnership government and a complex set of interlocking relationships between the different islands. The new protocol has been dubbed “Chequers for Northern Ireland” by some because it is comparable to Theresa May`s future plan for the future relationship in the UK, which had already been rejected by the EU and criticised by Johnson.  The Irish government supported the proposal.
 The Democratic Unionist Party strongly opposed this because it weakens Northern Ireland`s place in the UK and is seen as the main reason why Theresa May`s withdrawal agreement was never approved by the British Parliament.  The UK government rejected the originally proposed text. This gave people the opportunity to live their lives and do business according to elected officials on a north-south and/or east-west basis. Combined with a commitment to human rights and equality alongside power-sharing, this balance of relations has essentially removed the heat of the constitutional conflict. .