Their has been a distinct cooling of relations between the UK and the US since the heady days of Blair hitching his star to the American President only to see it destroy his reputation and political career.
Gordon Brown, in this evenings foreign policy speech, has failed to heed the fatal mistake of his predecessor and cosied up to the George Bush regime, stating that Britain's most important relationship is with the United States.
I do not know what led Brown to reach this conclusion but as he was an integral part of the Government when the Iraq adventure began, he could not of failed to notice that when push came to shove, Britain's opinion in 2003 counted for nothing.
Nobody could of batted their eyelids and played footsie with George Bush more than Tony Blair but he did not achieve one iota of shift in US policy before jumping headfirst into the debacle with him.
After such rejection, Brown should be aware that he has to be cautious about putting the stamp of approval on the special relationship as long as Bush is in the White House, even more so with overtures of another ethically shaky US led conflict starting up in the Middle East.
Where Blair failed, Brown seems to think he can succeed but if he assumes he can make us matter more than we actually do to the American Administration he is deluding himself.
We are a minor player with very little clout in the World and piling in with the most right wing and divisive US President in living memory will not endear us to anyone or enhance our already battered and bloodied reputation.
13 comments:
I share your concern, but I'm going to reserve judgment about Brown until I see what he does rather than just what he says. He's a politician after all.
However, I think the withdrawal from the impossible situation in Basra (to the clear annoyance of the Bush administration) gives an early sign that we're going to try to re-establish some sort of independent foreign policy.
Following the handover to Brown, I think that the trans-Atlantic rhetoric was always going to be quite friendly and 'touchy-feely'. We have so many shared interests around the world, and are natural allies and friends. And I don't have a problem with this at all, so long as the actions that follow the rhetoric will enhance, rather than detract from, our national interest.
Tony Blair clearly got confused between partner and lapdog, and didn't mind forgetting about the national interest of the nation he was elected to serve.
I don't have a problem with sharing interests with a kind, benevolent America. I do think after Iraq, Brown would have a problem with us climbing into bed again with the Bush version of America. Appears he does not.
Looks like a bit of political lip service. All I see is a guy, probably very wisely, not wanting bad blood with the main superpower when he knows that a new administration is going to come anyway.
Main superpower, eh? Perhaps Americans haven't heard of Europe, Russia and China!
They're still just potential superpowers for the moment, Daniel. As is India, for that matter. The most common belief right now is that the USA is the only post-Cold War superpower*.
And this is only one of the reasons why it's understandable that Brown wants to stay on good terms with them... As already noted however, 'doing a Blair' (i.e. slipping his trousers off and bending over the sofa for them) would be less understandable, and less forgivable.
*There are a few caveats to be noted here, such as the post-Cold War trend towards multipolarity, as well as the current demonstration in the Middle East about the limits of military force in achieving a benign strategic environment for yourself and your allies.
Things have changed very quickly in only a few short years, but most experts in international relations would agree that the USA remains the one global superpower at this time.
PS: One of these days I'm going to write a comment on politics that doesn't betray my wish to stove Tony Blair's head in with a 3 pound mallet... I can't see it happening anytime soon though.
But what if Russia and China join together, Cheezy?
That's an interesting point, and actually, Sino-Russian relations are currently at what's probably an all-time high...
There's a lot more to be said about this situation (probably in a different post, as it's a bit off-topic) but my overall point is that, with Russia and China, we're still talking about a potential unitary superpower, not a current one like the US is.
I have been waiting for the Chinese escalation to superpower to run out of steam and stall for some time but it just seems to go on rolling along.
I have yet to be convinced of India's potential and i cannot see Russia staying for the long haul.
If Europe can get it's act together, i can see the EU becoming a force to be reckoned with but Bush will go and someone else will take his place and the USA will be top of the tree for some time yet.
"Perhaps Americans haven't heard of Europe, Russia and China!"
Hmmm........Europe, Russia, and China. That rings a bell. Let's see....... Oh, yes! They're the ones we have our vastly more numerous and powerful nuclear weapons pointed at! I remember them now.
Gee, Joe, an American who's actually heard of China, Russia and Europe.
Wonders will never cease!
daniel,
yeah - we've heard of 'em. we've been protecting the UK and Europe from one of them for about 50 years.
Anony, currently the whole world needs protection FROM America! Cheers.
Post a Comment