The relationship between Britain and America has been something of an on-off affair.
Just over 200 years ago, a group of people representing Britain's 13 colonies in what is now the United States started telling the British that they would like their "freedom", which was a bit rich coming from a group of slave owners who detested, unlike the British, the Native Indians. Their resentment mainly stemmed from the fact that Britain taxed its people - they were British - in North America to help pay off Britain's national debt, which had ballooned as a result of Britain's Seven Years' War again France. But the Americans argued "No Taxation Without Representation", ignoring the fact that only 3% of people in Britain itself were represented in Parliament at the time.
Then there was World War I. For three out of the four years in which it was fought, the British assumed that if the US entered the war then it would enter on the side of Germany and the Axis powers. It wasn't until German agents attacked American ammunition supplies on the Black Tom Pier in Jersey City that they entered the war in 1917.
The Americans were now Britain's friends. But they still hadn't learnt about the dangers of appeasement, because along came World War II and again the Americans watched from the sidelines thinking they'be be OK - until 7th December 1941 when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
The US and Britain have been friends ever since until, maybe, now.
A group of Bitish MPs have said that the phrase "Special Relationship" is no longer appropriate as Britain’s is just one of a series of relationships the United States has with key allies and that the British Government should be less "deferential" towards the US.
The British are starting to take the attitude which Obama has shown towards them since taking office. One of his first duties since becoming President was to take the bust of Winston Churchill out of the Oval Office.
MPs: Our special relationship with America is over
By Miles Goslett
28th March 2010
Daily Mail
Britain's special relationship with America is over, says a committee of MPs.
The cross-party Commons Foreign Affairs Committee has said the phrase is no longer appropriate as Britain’s is just one of a series of relationships the United States has with key allies.
MPs said that the Government should be ‘less deferential’ towards the Americans as the perception of the UK after the Iraq war as ‘America’s poodle’ had been damaging to Britain’s reputation.
End of the affair: The Government must be 'less deferential' towards the Americans as the perception of the UK after the Iraq war as 'America's poodle' had been damaging to Britain's reputation - thanks to Tony Blair and George W Bush
The phrase was coined 60 years ago by Winston Churchill in the aftermath of the Second World War and was inspired both by the countries’ shared struggle against Nazi Germany and the looming Cold War confrontation with the Soviet Union.
It was especially pertinent during the Premiership of Margaret Thatcher when she forged a close political and personal bond with President Ronald Reagan in the Eighties.
They were elected within 18 months of each other and struck up a rapport which lasted almost a decade, until 1988, when Reagan stepped down. Their mutual hatred of communism and shared love of the free market meant they spoke more often than any other American and British leaders with the possible exception of Churchill and Roosevelt.
On one occasion as Lady Thatcher was haranguing Mr Reagan during telephone conversation, he remarked to an aide: ‘Isn’t she marvellous?’
But the MPs have argued that Britain’s declining military and economic power means the phrase no longer accurately reflects dealings between the two countries.
A report by the Committee also warned that in the eyes of the rest of the world, the relationship was now more likely to be defined by what was generally seen to be Tony Blair’s unquestioning support for President George Bush over the Iraq war.
The Committee added: ‘The use of the phrase ‘‘the special relationship’’ in its historical sense, to describe the totality of the ever-evolving UK-US relationship, is potentially misleading, and we recommend that its use should be avoided.’
The recommendation proved controversial, with five members – three Labour and two Tories – voting against dropping the term.
The Committee said that it was merely mirroring the attitude taken by President Barack Obama towards Britain since he entered the White House.
It said: ‘The UK’s relationship should be principally driven by the UK’s national interests within individual policy areas. It needs to be characterised by a hard-headed political approach to the relationship and a realistic sense of the UK’s limits.
‘The foreign policy approach we are advocating is in many ways similar to the more pragmatic tone President Obama has adopted towards the UK.’
Committee chairman Mike Gapes said politicians had been ‘guilty of over-optimism’ about their ability to influence the US.
He said: ‘We must be realistic and accept that globalisation, structural changes and shifts in geopolitical power will inevitably affect the UK-US relationship. Over the longer-term the UK is unlikely to be able to influence the US to the extent that it has in the past.’
READERS' COMMENTS
Good. Now let Obama do his own fighting. Bring our troops home and let Obama get his other friends to help him. He has some hope. They talk but do not fight.
- jolliffe, uk
****************************
The USA has basically footed over half of Europe's defense bill since the start of the Cold War. This giant subsidy was what enabled many European countries like Britain and France to initiate their extensive welfare states, which of course are now in danger of going bankrupt even with such a large continuous subsidy. In return, of course, America gets to listen to whining leftists wrongly complain that Britain is America's "poodle," a situation which of course they have now willingly traded in order to become the EU's poodle instead. The difference being that at least the leaders of America are chosen by democratic elections, unlike the unelected leader of the EU.
- William, New York City, USA
**************************************
Then what are you waiting for ? Bring the troops home. Stupid.
- Ms D.Lee, Hong Kong
************************************
I am old enough to remember World War Two from the beginning. USA did nothing until Pearl Harbour in 1942. And only when they realised they were under threat did they come into the war. USA as always used different countryies for their own purpose. Consequently this country is finished due to BLAIR being a lapdog to America.
- Peter, Withernsea, England
dailymail.co.uk
Just over 200 years ago, a group of people representing Britain's 13 colonies in what is now the United States started telling the British that they would like their "freedom", which was a bit rich coming from a group of slave owners who detested, unlike the British, the Native Indians. Their resentment mainly stemmed from the fact that Britain taxed its people - they were British - in North America to help pay off Britain's national debt, which had ballooned as a result of Britain's Seven Years' War again France. But the Americans argued "No Taxation Without Representation", ignoring the fact that only 3% of people in Britain itself were represented in Parliament at the time.
Then there was World War I. For three out of the four years in which it was fought, the British assumed that if the US entered the war then it would enter on the side of Germany and the Axis powers. It wasn't until German agents attacked American ammunition supplies on the Black Tom Pier in Jersey City that they entered the war in 1917.
The Americans were now Britain's friends. But they still hadn't learnt about the dangers of appeasement, because along came World War II and again the Americans watched from the sidelines thinking they'be be OK - until 7th December 1941 when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
The US and Britain have been friends ever since until, maybe, now.
A group of Bitish MPs have said that the phrase "Special Relationship" is no longer appropriate as Britain’s is just one of a series of relationships the United States has with key allies and that the British Government should be less "deferential" towards the US.
The British are starting to take the attitude which Obama has shown towards them since taking office. One of his first duties since becoming President was to take the bust of Winston Churchill out of the Oval Office.
MPs: Our special relationship with America is over
By Miles Goslett
28th March 2010
Daily Mail
Britain's special relationship with America is over, says a committee of MPs.
The cross-party Commons Foreign Affairs Committee has said the phrase is no longer appropriate as Britain’s is just one of a series of relationships the United States has with key allies.
MPs said that the Government should be ‘less deferential’ towards the Americans as the perception of the UK after the Iraq war as ‘America’s poodle’ had been damaging to Britain’s reputation.
End of the affair: The Government must be 'less deferential' towards the Americans as the perception of the UK after the Iraq war as 'America's poodle' had been damaging to Britain's reputation - thanks to Tony Blair and George W Bush
The phrase was coined 60 years ago by Winston Churchill in the aftermath of the Second World War and was inspired both by the countries’ shared struggle against Nazi Germany and the looming Cold War confrontation with the Soviet Union.
It was especially pertinent during the Premiership of Margaret Thatcher when she forged a close political and personal bond with President Ronald Reagan in the Eighties.
They were elected within 18 months of each other and struck up a rapport which lasted almost a decade, until 1988, when Reagan stepped down. Their mutual hatred of communism and shared love of the free market meant they spoke more often than any other American and British leaders with the possible exception of Churchill and Roosevelt.
On one occasion as Lady Thatcher was haranguing Mr Reagan during telephone conversation, he remarked to an aide: ‘Isn’t she marvellous?’
But the MPs have argued that Britain’s declining military and economic power means the phrase no longer accurately reflects dealings between the two countries.
A report by the Committee also warned that in the eyes of the rest of the world, the relationship was now more likely to be defined by what was generally seen to be Tony Blair’s unquestioning support for President George Bush over the Iraq war.
The Committee added: ‘The use of the phrase ‘‘the special relationship’’ in its historical sense, to describe the totality of the ever-evolving UK-US relationship, is potentially misleading, and we recommend that its use should be avoided.’
The recommendation proved controversial, with five members – three Labour and two Tories – voting against dropping the term.
The Committee said that it was merely mirroring the attitude taken by President Barack Obama towards Britain since he entered the White House.
It said: ‘The UK’s relationship should be principally driven by the UK’s national interests within individual policy areas. It needs to be characterised by a hard-headed political approach to the relationship and a realistic sense of the UK’s limits.
‘The foreign policy approach we are advocating is in many ways similar to the more pragmatic tone President Obama has adopted towards the UK.’
Committee chairman Mike Gapes said politicians had been ‘guilty of over-optimism’ about their ability to influence the US.
He said: ‘We must be realistic and accept that globalisation, structural changes and shifts in geopolitical power will inevitably affect the UK-US relationship. Over the longer-term the UK is unlikely to be able to influence the US to the extent that it has in the past.’
READERS' COMMENTS
Good. Now let Obama do his own fighting. Bring our troops home and let Obama get his other friends to help him. He has some hope. They talk but do not fight.
- jolliffe, uk
****************************
The USA has basically footed over half of Europe's defense bill since the start of the Cold War. This giant subsidy was what enabled many European countries like Britain and France to initiate their extensive welfare states, which of course are now in danger of going bankrupt even with such a large continuous subsidy. In return, of course, America gets to listen to whining leftists wrongly complain that Britain is America's "poodle," a situation which of course they have now willingly traded in order to become the EU's poodle instead. The difference being that at least the leaders of America are chosen by democratic elections, unlike the unelected leader of the EU.
- William, New York City, USA
**************************************
Then what are you waiting for ? Bring the troops home. Stupid.
- Ms D.Lee, Hong Kong
************************************
I am old enough to remember World War Two from the beginning. USA did nothing until Pearl Harbour in 1942. And only when they realised they were under threat did they come into the war. USA as always used different countryies for their own purpose. Consequently this country is finished due to BLAIR being a lapdog to America.
- Peter, Withernsea, England
dailymail.co.uk
Last edited:
