More like this
Vichy Britain: the truth exposed by WikiLeaks
For special relationship read special doormat, says Neil Clark in the light of latest WikiLeaks disclosures
Oh, how the mighty have fallen! A hundred years ago, Britain was the centre of a vast global empire, which controlled about a quarter of the world. Today, as the WikiLeaks disclosures reveal, the one-time rulers of the world have been reduced to the status of arch-crawlers to American imperial power.
Saturday's batch of leaked cables - published by the Guardian - reveal how leading Conservatives, when in opposition, promised to US diplomats that they would run a 'pro-American regime' and buy more US arms once they got into power.
The level of obsequiousness shown by the self-confessed 'children of Thatcher' to their imperial masters in Washington is quite extraordinary.
To stress his pro-American credentials, William Hague, now Foreign Secretary, reveals that he has a sister who is an American and that he vacations in the US. He assures the US Deputy Chief of Mission that he, George Osborne and David Cameron, are "staunchly Atlanticist".
Liam Fox, now Defence Secretary, affirms his party's desire to "follow a much more pro-American profile in procurement". Fox also boasts about how he has "rebuffed" those in the Conservative party who are less enthusiastic about the US alliance than he is, and who have been asserting that "we're supposed to be partners with, not supplicants to, the United States".
It's hard not to laugh at this shameless sucking-up to Uncle Sam. Even the Americans themselves are shown by the leaked cables to find the British neurosis about the so-called 'special relationship' amusing.
But in reality there's nothing very funny about the British elite's sycophancy towards America - because the consequences in recent years have been calamitous.
Our determination to follow the US, come what may, has seen us become involved in disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq - conflicts where the wisest course for Britain would have been to stay on the sidelines.
Our "staunchly Atlanticist" elite have helped make Britain a prime target for Islamic terrorists. Does anyone seriously believe that the 7/7 bomb attacks in London would have happened if Britain had not taken part in the Iraq war?
In return for its slavish obedience, Britain has received precious little, if anything, in return from Washington. As WikiLeaks revealed last week, Prime Minister Gordon Brown couldn't even get the US to agree to allow Gary McKinnon, the 43-year-old computer hacker with Asperger's Syndrome, who is accused of hacking into US government computers, to serve his jail sentence in Britain.
For 'special relationship' read 'special doormat'.
The tragedy is that it doesn't have to be like this. For the first 35 years after World War Two, our leaders were far less sycophantic towards America, despite Britain's indebtedness to the US.
Harold Wilson, to his great credit, refused to send British troops to Vietnam. Edward Heath defied Washington by adopting a policy of strict neutrality during the 1973 Yom Kippur war between the Arab states and Israel and refused to allow the United States to use Britain's spy and air bases on Cyprus.
But from 1979, things changed dramatically. Margaret Thatcher's election not only destroyed the domestic post-war mixed-economy consensus, it also shifted Britain's foreign policy towards a more hardline pro-American stance.
And when the Blairites took over the Labour Party in the mid-1990s, both Britain's main political parties were in the control of people happy to pledge their undying allegiance to Pax Americana.
Public opinion has had nothing whatsoever to do with this shift.
Given our historical and linguistic ties, most would consider it perfectly reasonable for Britain and America to enjoy amicable relations. But there is a world of difference between the Anglo-US friendship of the immediate post-war era and today's subservience.
Things could get worse if, as seems possible, a gung-ho right-wing Republican president evicts Barack Obama and takes over at the White House in January 2013.
If a President Palin or a President Huckabee asks the British government for support in a US/Israeli attack on Iran in early 2013, we know only too well what the response of the 'staunchly Atlanticist' Cameron, Hague and Fox is likely to be. Yet a war with Iran would almost certainly develop into a full-scale Middle East conflict, and be far bloodier than even the Iraq invasion.
The cables detailing Hague and Co's crawling behaviour towards the Americans make me think of Vichy France under the Germans. If Britain is foolish enough to get involved in such a terrible bloodbath, we'll only have our Vichy-esque elite to blame. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
Oh England, dear England! Don't like the pushy Yanks, don't trust the Frogs, Wops, Squareheads and assorted odd countries of Europe, and can't go it alone in a rapidly changing and very dangerous world - what to do? Churchill and Lloyd George are a distant memory, and which young person now knows or cares about Palmerston, Gladstone, or Pitt the Younger? Europe, seemingly the least attractive option, is in reality the ONLY option. What else is there?
History tells us that one tribe dominates another for a bit and then withdraws. The Chinese are doing what the British always did which was to preceed colonization by trade and then feed some silly wars like chasing off the Persians in India. Whilst we are fighting to stop Arabs who really want to get Westernized, the Chinese will soon have us on a hook rather as we had the Manchurian Empress. It makes sense to abolish the defense budget as any nation that wants to conquer the UK by force of arms will have to conquer Europe first. Then the books would have a chance to balance and the takeover might be postponed for a long time if the country gets economically viable. Our pied Pipers are a bit like the the last Romam Emperors who were worried about the chickens when the Vandals came in. They are lead by a Cameron from a clan that has been on the losing side of of most battles who has the baton now. He took it over from cheque signer Brown who took over from impressario Blair who set up a theatre of wars as productive as the games in Rome. The way it is going we may end up like Winston Smith getting peace in the loo before come out to do cleaning jobs in chinese mansions or even going off the Africa to do some more peace keeping there. The best hope for avoiding another cycle of history is Wikileaks. His job has to be done before the Chinese take over ...
The problem is, if at the next general election the british electorate, voted out this lib/con rubbish, who would replace them(Not Labour they are in the dustbin of history) Sadly we have not got, a political party, or any politicians with any backbone.
"...the US is not Nazi Germany."
True, but only because the US is much more evil!
Vichy Britain - how dare you? They sent 000's of French to gas chambers .. how dare you! People like you do us a great injustice.
It would be interesting to read the cables that come the other way; I am sure we have views on the US.
If you have an alliance, which we have and it is called NATO (and the UK and US are the most active), then you have to have a policy towards your ally. You seem to want to have your cake and eat it. You castigate the damned Yankees, but you fail to suggest alternatives. The French? The Germans? All guaranteed to let you down as I saw in Gulf War One.
I don't like the fact that the UK is now a post-imperialist power more than anyone, and I don't always like the Americans, but I do know I would rather the UK stands with them than anyone else (plus Canada and ANZAC). We share heritage and common values and an appreciation for freedom which may have been tarnished in recent years but is undimmed.
Final point. I do not see the UK rushing to support US military adventures as we did under Blair. It just will not happen as we have all been far too badly burned. However, when it comes to the future war he does discuss - Iran - yes we will, and should suport it. He says "Yet a war with Iran would almost certainly develop into a full-scale Middle East conflict, and be far bloodier than even the Iraq invasion." What is the basis for this statement? He obviosly did not read the cables from the Arabs encouraging the US to bomb Iran. An oversight or just lefty selective journalism?
our recent governments have shown no independence of thought and even less self respect when it comes to the special relationship with the USA. It's humiliating, and has led to disastrous consequences for our hapless military, who have been sacrificed to satisfy our leaders desperate passion for diplomatic brown nosin' .. and it is has not served our country's interests at all.
british, and ozzian, politicians know that re-election is difficult if the evil empire destabilizes your economy. so they crawl.
i would suggest importing the swiss constitution, but democracy is too hard for english speakers.
The British press can be relied upon to be apoplectic with rage if the rest of the world is not grateful for us beating the Nazis in the C20th or beating the French in the C19th or for building a mighty empire in C18th and C17th. Time to look to the future (Michael), that's the era of my grand children. My grandparents were the past and are, sadly, all dead. My grandchildren will live on in the future. As for funding Europe, it's probably a good investment, but don't expect eternal gratitude, just a return on the investment. I suspect that you are a reporter.
Every neophyte courtesan is familiar with the basic procedure for dealing with a powerful suitor - she must withhold or ration her favors. If she fails to follow this fundamental strategy, she will soon lose her allure, and be perceived as tiresome and needy. Apparently this obvious psychological insight has escaped the limited intellects of Britain's political leaders like Cameron, Blair and Hague. As the Wikileaks cables have shown, they are despised as pathetic doormats - or to put it in contemporary terminology: booty calls.
@Dominic Wynn: A client regime is a client regime, even if the Patron is somewhat benevolent. An outsider will always call the shots, with their own needs coming first.
And as for the US not being Nazi Germany... just wait. What are now scapegoating of "the other," marginalizations of the weak internally and "pre-emptive strikes" internationally are on the edge of escalating. If the Tea Partiers get any power, as they appear to be poised to do, you may yet eat those words. Do not underestimate their rise, buffoons as they might seem from a distance.
Britain no longer has much in the way of owned production facilities. I remember when the Eropeans came to visit SCOW to see steel being made, the reintroduction of improved Bessemer converters. Now Britain is not going to make Cadbury Chocolate, which is OK, I bought my last bar when they closed the Welsh plant. I was briefly a EuroSceptic, but as I watch Germany rise from the ashes, and President Sarkozy sign contract after contract with Russia, Brazil, China and India, note that a major section of British water and fuel is ccontrolled by the likes of EDF, it is obvious we must be part of the EU. It almost happened in 1950 that France and Britain became one, but Eden wanted his Suez war. When I wrote recently on joining the EU more vvigorously, one blogger called me raving mad - so be it - I personaly believe integration with Europe to be a far better move, than continuing to be Obama or any other US president's lap dog, doormat or whatever. Number one chuckout William IMALAPDOG Hague.
The USA has done nothing for us in over 200 years. Why should we go on crawling around them? Where were they when the Falklands were invaded? We should distance this country from the USA, pull our brave military personnel out of Afghanistan and Iraq and be ourselves for once instead of always thinking what the USA will think. All those from the USA, try thinking what YOU would think if the situation was reversed?
The UK funds the US war efforts too!
Cameron is a bland sycophant with little knowledge of the world. Obama is a lame duck president of a failing empire. He has been set up for failure. Cameron will ensure that for himself. Like Blair he will leave office hands soaked in blood.
As has been pointed out its only the elitist who love the US not the people who still laughing at the stupidity of US leaders.
Uk should just accept that it is part of Europe, with much less influence than Germany (they have wonderful human rights record too). The US is dragging down the sycophantic UK with it.
China treated both Cameron and Obama with the minimum of respect and those who have any inkling of their culture know that Cameron was given no face by the Chinese leadership. The Chinese certainly laugh at the UK's subservience to the US, but then they laugh at the Japanese for the same reason. They want out technology-- for now-- and that's all.
The world's greatest superpower can't even win a war with a handful of men living in caves in a third world country!
We read too many history books...the US is a super power in decline. The future lies else where....and that is hwere we should focus ourselves.
Posted by John Tidswell at 11:10am "...Europe has lots of space and good growing conditions, but will they have us in 30 years time? If we continue to isolate ourselves from Europe..."..........is this some sort of joke? We FUND the EU - the UK is the second biggest net contributor. At the rate they are running out of bailout funds for Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain...(I am being kind on the last remaining of the PIIGS), it will be, "Can we afford the EU?"
I find this article really sad. When we were described as, "An expendable American air base," (Clinton, I think). We should have taken note of our place.
We have a small country housing 70 million people. In 50 years time our population will be between 120 and 140 million (based on population growth over the past 50 years). Our prime concerns will be feeding and housing, not war and the world cup. Europe has lots of space and good growing conditions, but will they have us in 30 years time? If we continue to isolate ourselves from Europe we will not be doing our grandchildren many favours.
Wake up (once) Great Britain, and think this through.
Three choices. Go it alone. Go "Shoulder to shoulder," with the "Good old US of A." or join fully with mainland Europe. Not difficult really, but it's only my opinion !
"But in reality there's nothing very funny about the British elite's sycophancy towards America."
Shouldn't that read "there's nothing very funny about the British elite's sychophancy towards the EU"?
Lordy. Offensive much? Whether or not we're a client regime, the US is not Nazi Germany.
Few people would object to pax Americana - it's the belli amerikana that is the problem.
It is all a replay of ancient history. For the USA read Rome and for the UK read Greece. There was a brain drain then too. All the best doctors in Rome were Greek. Medicine was too subtle an art for the Romans. All they could do was fight and conquer. In the end they lost out to the barbarians. Funny to recall that the instinctive attitude of the British soldier to his American counterpart was distrust. At least, it was in Korea. Their instinct has proved more true than the current bunch.