Welcome to the Guardian's weekly Brexit briefing, a summary of developments as the UK heads towards the EU door marked "exit". If you'd like to receive it as a weekly early morning email, please sign up here. You can listen to our latest Brexit Means … podcast, on the rights of EU citizens in the UK, here. And now that a general election is under way in the UK, you can also sign up to the Snap, our daily email election briefing, here.
Also: producing the Guardian's independent, in-depth journalism takes a lot of time and money. We do it because we believe our perspective matters – and it may well be your perspective too. If you value our Brexit coverage, become a Guardian Supporter and help make our future more secure. Thank you. The big picture It seems the first and perhaps trickiest agreement (if any agreement is possible after that dinner – see below) in the upcoming Brexit talks is going to have to be on what exactly they will be about. Hours after a Brussels summit in which EU leaders – some calling the UK's stance "unreal" – again insisted it will have to settle the details of its divorce from the bloc before it can talk future trade, Theresa May said no. Speaking to the BBC's Andrew Marr, May said the talks should run in parallel, going so far as to add that a "comprehensive" trade deal was within Britain's grasp by the time it leaves in March 2019: Yes, they do want to start some discussions about money. I'm very clear that at the end of the negotiation we need to be clear not just about the exit but also what our future relationship is going to be. In case anyone had not got the message, the prime minister added: The EU has also said nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. I want to ensure we agree on a trade deal and our withdrawal arrangements so we know what both of those are when we leave.
How this initial standoff is resolved could prove crucial to the eventual outcome of the talks: both sides are camped firmly on their respective positions for good reason and will not back down easily. The EU27's top objective is to ensure the deal Britain ends up with is worse than membership. It wants to show that leaving the bloc is not easy, and that pain (meeting commitments) must come before gain (future trade). But the UK clearly expects to be cut some slack – partly to create scope for trade-offs between the two sets of agreements, and partly so May can be seen to be making quick progress, which could be important at home. Hold tight. The view from Europe The chances of talks failing are "over 50%", EU commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker and his team have concluded after a reportedly disastrous pre-summit dinner with May on Wednesday. "I'm leaving Downing Street 10 times more sceptical than I was before," Juncker told the prime minister, apparently appalled by the UK's "simplistic" take on key issues such as Britain's divorce bill and the future rights of EU citizens. According to the account, in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, Juncker – who now believes Britain is seriously underestimating the complexity of what is to come – later told Angela Merkel May was "on a different galaxy". In perhaps the most telling exchange, May implored Juncker, "Let us make Brexit a success." The commission president responded that while he didn't want chaos, "Brexit cannot be a success." No 10 has said it does not recognise the account. But perhaps unsurprisingly after that, Saturday's Brussels EU27 summit took just four minutes to unanimously agree the bloc's negotiating stance, and applaud it. It was uncompromising, and pretty straightforward: Britain must first address the issues of its estimated €60bn divorce bill from the bloc, the rights of the 3 million EU nationals in the UK, and the border in Ireland. The remaining 27 EU members will decide when "sufficient progress" has been made on these, and only then – probably not until the end of the year – will the talks be able to turn to an outline trade agreement. Meanwhile, back in Westminster The election campaign rumbled thrillingly on, with the Conservative party continuing to enjoy an 18-point lead in the polls and saying "strong and stable leadership" more often than any sane person could want to hear it.
As the Tories signalled they were ready to abandon pledges not to raise national insurance and income tax, Labour came under pressure to step aside in two constituencies to help Greens defeat Conservatives. Two senior former shadow cabinet members also said the party should offer the public a referendum on the final Brexit deal, and Tony Blair said he plans to get stuck in because Brexit would do so much harm to the economy. The Lib Dems were grateful, one presumes, for the news that Rachel Johnson, sister of two Conservative ministers including foreign secretary Boris, is joining the party in protest at the Tories' stance on Brexit. And in the last chance saloon, Ukip leader Paul Nuttall said he would stand in the heavily Brexit-supporting constituency of Boston and Skegness as support for his party drops by the week, with many voters defecting to the Tories. You should also know Read these In the Guardian, Matthew d'Ancona says that as the UK heads into what it concedes will be tough talks with the EU, hard Brexiters should fear an all-powerful Theresa May – because she will surely use it against them: Whatever else the Tory manifesto includes, the core purpose of this general election is – overtly – to grant her the freedom to manoeuvre that she requires in order to negotiate effectively. What she seeks on 8 June is not, as is so often claimed, a mandate for hard Brexit, but the ability – should she so choose – to tell the hard Brexiteers to shove off. Only this way can May manage the nuance, complexities and trade-offs that the talks are bound to involve … It is often said that only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Whatever else the prime minister may be, an idiot she is not. In the Financial Times (paywall), Philip Stephens argues that May is "dangerously disdainful" of dissent, and says a big post-election majority is not going to change the EU's stance: May assumes a monopoly of wisdom on setting Britain's terms for EU exit. The record suggests she can claim anything but … A crushing majority would not necessarily be good for May and her party. The late Francis Pym, one of Margaret Thatcher's cabinet ministers, famously warned during the 1983 election campaign that another big majority for the Tories would not make for good government. Thatcher duly swept back to power with a majority of 144 and sacked Pym for disloyalty. Her minister, though, was right. The Lady herself was ultimately brought down by the arrogance and complacency that comes with an absence of effective opposition. May would do well to take note. Tweet of the week | 
Posts
Theresa May greeting Jean-Claude Juncker outside No 10. A German newspaper reported Juncker later saying: 'I'm leaving Downing Street 10 times more sceptical than I was before.' Photograph: Justin Tallis/AFP/Getty Images 