Leo Varadkar, Ireland’s prime minister, is being demonised by the Brexit-supporting section of the British press. His determination to stick by the backstop provision in the EU withdrawal agreement has particularly outraged the Daily Telegraph and the Sun.

Both papers, with tacit support from the Daily Express, are engaged in a tactic familiar to those who, down the years, witnessed the treatment that has been handed out to homegrown politicians such as Tony Benn, Michael Foot, Neil Kinnock and, of course, Jeremy Corbyn.

Varadkar is being groomed as the Brexit bogeyman, not least because, with the changing of the guard in Brussels, he is currently the most identifiable individual defending the European Union’s position.

In order to ram home their propaganda, the papers have blamed him for the likelihood of Britain crashing out of the EU. A Sun editorial claimed that Varadkar would be responsible for “the potential chaos of a no-deal Brexit”.

It even dared to refer to him witheringly as “Ireland’s rookie PM”, which is a bit rich given that Varadkar has been in office for more than two years while the Sun’s great hero, Boris Johnson, has been in No 10 for barely a week.

For historical humbug, however, it is difficult to better the accusation by the Sunday Telegraph’s columnist, Simon Heffer, that Varadkar is guilty of being “wrong to disregard the ancient ties between Britain and Ireland”. Does he not understand that it is the continuation of those ties, through Britain’s retention of six Irish counties, that is the very reason for the problem?

British media antagonism may well improve Varadkar’s status

Heffer’s bizarre belief is that Varadkar and his deputy, Simon Coveney, want “to be weaponised by Brussels in the EU’s determination to force a no-deal Brexit”. Given that such a scenario would be crippling to Ireland’s economy, that is a ludicrous claim.

The following day, the Telegraph’s commentator, Nick Timothy (and former chief of staff to ex-prime minister Theresa May), also turned reality on its head by accusing Varadkar of being “the real threat to peace”. He contended that the taoiseach’s “hardline stance on the backstop risks bringing back a hard border and destabilising the Good Friday agreement”. Not content with that, he then argued that Varadkar “doesn’t understand the Good Friday agreement”.

So, Varadkar is being scapegoated as the villain of the piece, but also the villain of the peace. Then again, the Telegraph’s criticism of Varadkar goes back at least a year. In July 2018, one of its commentators, Tom Harris, called Varadkar “ill-informed and arrogant” and “not up to the task when it comes to Brexit”.

Another of its commentators, Ruth Dudley Edwards, wrote in January of Varadkar being “naive” and of suddenly realising, supposedly, that Ireland was being “used to punish Britain”. No proof, of course, just a wrong-headed opinion based on an intense dislike for the Irish government’s reliance on the backstop as the best way to avoid a hard border.

Another theme of the anti-Varadkar coverage is the suggestion that his stance does not command the support of the Irish people. The Express approvingly cited a poll carried in an Irish newspaper, the Sunday Independent, which found that only 43%of the Irish population were satisfied with their prime minister’s handling of the Brexit process.

But this did not take account of the fact that Varadkar’s overall poll ratings have been in decline for some time, and that this is not related to Brexit. It should not be taken to indicate a lack of popular support for his line on the backstop. Just the reverse. It is possible to argue that Varadkar’s poll numbers would be lower still without his steadfast backing for the withdrawal agreement. Indeed, British media antagonism may well improve Varadkar’s status.

According to a Sun leading article, from the moment Johnson became prime minister there was “panic” in Dublin, with Varadkar “ramping up his rhetoric now we [Britain] have a PM who means business”.

Several papers sought to represent Tuesday’s phone conversation between Johnson and Varadkar as a “clash”, although all the evidence from both sides suggests both men, without rancour, simply restated their opposing views on the backstop. Over a photo of Johnson clutching a chicken during his visit to a Welsh poultry farm, the Sun carried the headline: “For cluck’s sake, Leo, give us an eggsit.”

Seen in the context of the paper’s previous attacks on Varadkar, the thinly veiled message of the childish pun was that it is not only open season on Ireland’s prime minister but, perhaps, on Ireland itself.

Needless to say, the Irish edition of the Sun was altogether more sympathetic towards the taoiseach, featuring a picture of Varadkar with a bubble caption aimed at Johnson and containing a very different pun: “Stop choking the chicken and let’s do a deal already.”

• Roy Greenslade is professor of journalism at City University and a Guardian columnist