Sunday, March 28, 2010

All good (and not so good) things come to an end.

So the special relationship is over, that being the one between the UK and USA. Not too surprising, was a bit obvious that Barrack Obama was no Anglophile and his refusal to support us over the Falklands even to the extent of sending Clinton to talk to the Argentinian president during the latest spat.

BBC.
The UK government needs to be "less deferential" towards the US and more willing to say no to Washington, a group of MPs have said.
The Commons Foreign Affairs committee also said it was wrong to speak of "the special relationship" with the US, as it was fostering other alliances.
However, the MPs did agree that the link between the countries was "profound and valuable".
The Foreign Office said the two nations share a "unique" bond.
The committee said the phrase "the special relationship" did not reflect the "modern" Anglo-American relationship.
It was originally coined more than 60 years ago by Winston Churchill.
It was always more convenient for the USA and they always looked after their interests first (Suez) and using us as landing strip one and forward rocket base. So, if it has to end (not that it was really there) so be it, now would be a good time to disengage from their global hegemony anyway and start to become self reliant and a great trading nation again, rather than be seen as one of their lackeys. Doesn't mean we wont be friends, just no longer allies and no longer interested in their military misadventures.

3 annotations:

Antisthenes said...

I think client state may be a more accurate description than special relationship, and the US will ensure that continues. When the US says jump we just ask how high.

JuliaM said...

And here I thought this would be a post on the new of '24's cancellation.. ;)

tris said...

Ah... I suspect that the special relationship was no more than Antisthenis suggests. It is extremely handy for the US to have an ally that will always take their side, always be with them in their wars so that they are not alone.

It was a good relationship from that point of view. The US got an ally (the number of troops was small, but that fact that the US was not alone was important). In return Britain got to stay on the top table. The British PM got to stand in the Rose Garden next to the US President. The Danish Prime Minister never gets to do that.

OK From day one it didn’t look like Obama and Brown got on. Obama was in the business of ending the Iraq war he’s probably not in the business of starting another one. He doesn’t need us. He doesn’t like Brown. We already know that one of his aides said that the president found Brown depressing. From the first meeting and the first exchange of gifts, it was obvious that theirs was not a marriage made in heaven.

It over.

What have we got to lose? Probably something but I’m not sure what. At least as long as Obama is president I don’t see that changing. But who knows. There will be a new prime minster soon. Obama liked Cameron a bit better, but even that isn’t enough. He’s just not an anglophile. I wonder if he likes the Scots.... :-) (Actually, after Kenny let the Libyan go home to die I’m doubtin’ that!)