Britain will continue to stand side by side with US, says Brown
Gordon Brown is sending signals ahead of his visit with George Bush at Camp David that "all is well" between the US and Britain and that there will be no difference between his relationship with Bush and the one that Bush enjoyed with Tony Blair.
He declared:"It is in the British interest that the relationship with the United States is our single most important bilateral relationship."
Now, whilst the above is inarguably true, only a moron would believe that Brown is not determined to change the relationship which, more than any other, destroyed the premiership of Tony Blair.
Indeed, Brown has got off to a flying start with the British public precisely because of the subtle changes in policy he has brought about and the myriad of ways that he has signalled that this is a new government with a new set of priorities.
The relationship with the United States is, obviously, the most important one that any British Prime Minister has and Brown is not going to blow it, but neither is he going to ever put himself in any position where he could be labelled "Bush's poodle". The idea of Bush greeting the gruff Brown with the words, "Yo, Brown" is simply unthinkable.
It is to this end that Brown intends to fly to the UN immediately after his first meeting with Bush to signal to the rank and file of his party that, whilst we recognise the importance of the United States, we also recognise the importance of multilateralism in solving the world's problems.
So, whilst Brown is busy sending signals to Bush that all is well in the Special Relationship, he is also sending subtle signals to his own party of the difference in his relationship with Bush and that of his predecessor.
For instance, when Brown states that our relationship was "founded on our common values of liberty, opportunity and the dignity of the individual", the British Labour Party hears a subtle admonishment of torture.
And when Brown states that the relationship between the US and the UK "can become stronger in the years ahead", his own party mutters under it's breath, "When a Democrat is returned to the White House".
Brown plays a much more subtle game than the one Blair employed and Bush will find him totally affable, yet Brown will never cosy in with Bush the way Blair did.
For example, the White House are said to be annoyed that Brown has appointed Lord Malloch-Brown, the former deputy general secretary of the UN and an opponent of the Iraq war, as Foreign Office minister. Malloch-Brown was recently quoted as saying that the Brown government and the Bush regime would not be "joined at the hip". Brown has denied this whilst keeping Malloch-Brown exactly where he is, despite the White House's feelings about him. Blair is said to have replaced Jack Straw because of American objections over his comments vis a vis Iran, so Brown - by keeping Malloch-Brown in place - is letting British parliamentarians know that he chooses his own cabinet and that the Bush administration does not have an effective veto.
One major difference between Brown's relationship with Bush and Blair's will be brought about by political reality. Blair faced a President who could have been, and indeed was, in office for eight years. Brown faces a lame duck. Bush's power is waning whilst Brown's is in it's infancy, so their relationship will reflect that reality.
So the Special Relationship will change for the last eighteen months of Bush's premiership, despite any noises that Brown makes whilst at Camp David.
Click title for full article.
No comments:
Post a Comment