CAIRO, 19 October 2004 — Just when one thinks Tony Blair has had enough of standing shoulder to shoulder with his American counterpart, he surprises us all. His credibility in the eyes of his own public in tatters, Blair doesn’t even attempt to remove his studded collar, whose lead stretches to Washington. Instead, he fastens it a notch tighter as we saw this week when The Independent reported his apparent willingness to allow US interceptor missiles on British soil as part of a controversial American missile defense shield.
In response to another US administration demand, 600 British soldiers may be poised to take over from the US military in Sunni triangle hotspots, freeing up the latter and enabling them to pound Fallujah to a pulp in an effort to exterminate the elusive — some would say, mythical — Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi. Controversially, they will operate under a US command, despite opposition from British military high-ups concerned at differences between the aggressive US style and the British low-key approach.
The question here is: How real a difference will 600 make? A number of British politicians have concluded that the move is merely a political PR ploy, aimed at assisting George W. Bush in the upcoming Nov. 2 election.
One is left wondering why a left-of-center British premier is so keen to bolster a “black-and-white” right-wing American ideologue and his cabal of neoimperialists. What if Kerry makes it to the Oval Office? How frigid will be the initial Blair-Kerry handshake? How feeble will be the special relationship then?
By all accounts, the majority of British people are wondering what Britain gets out of the so-called special relationship these days; some might say a one-way relationship. There is no “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” about this one, at least not on the surface.
When it came to doling out Iraq reconstruction contracts, Britain was dumped at the back of the queue, while, thus far, Blair has failed to persuade the Bush administration to return the British “Guantanamo” detainees even though the legality of their ongoing incarceration has been repeatedly challenged while allegations of torture abound.
Furthermore, Blair has been ineffective in persuading Bush to do something concrete about the Israel-Palestine conflict even though the prime minister maintains it’s a crucial issue and one that is close to his heart. In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Bush did grudgingly show up at the Rose Garden to hastily mention the “road map” and a “two-state solution” — some say to appease Blair — but since then, zilch.
Another of Blair’s pet subjects is the Kyoto Treaty to which Russia recently signed up. Yet despite Blair’s enthusiasm and commitment to preserving the planet, he seems content to agree to differ with Bush, more concerned with appeasing his corporate friends than losing sleep over global warming.
Also troubling is the negative spin-off from the Blair-Bush special relationship vis-à-vis the EU. Some say that as long as the British government keeps one foot in the US and the other in Europe, its ability to set policy in Brussels suffers accordingly.
So why has Blair cooled on his commitment to Europe — in particular, the Single Currency and the new European constitution — in favor of a slavish devotion to the US? This is akin to any X-files episode.
It is easy to understand why Blair jumped on board the Bush “War on Terror” bandwagon post Sept. 11. Most countries did at the time, including Iran. It isn’t so easy, however, to figure why he is still on it and leading the charge with manpower, cash and rhetoric.
Indeed, far from showing signs of regret over the pre-emptive attack on Iraq — proved not to have possessed stockpiles of WMD or ties to terrorist groups, as alleged — he is about to recommend Orders of the British Empire (OBEs) for those of his cronies responsible for cooking up the discredited dodgy dossiers.
At the grass-roots level, the special relationship is already in tatters if we go by Carol Gould’s account, which first appeared on the website of frontpagemag.com.
Gould, an American, writes: “Something remarkable has been happening to me in the past 19 days...I am not attacked or intimidated. Where have I been visiting for the past two and a half weeks? Philadelphia. And where do I live? London.”
She says she is dismayed at the level of anti-Americanism in Britain, and stresses that the main culprits are not “the great unwashed” but British intellectuals. She no longer attends meetings of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) due to what she describes as “incessant vitriol about the crimes of my native country” and can’t take a cab without being harangued by the driver.
Going by a series of articles in The Guardian, the antipathy goes both ways. Following an Oct. 13 article entitled “Dear Clark County voter, give us back the America we loved. Yours sincerely, John Le Carre”, America responded.
The Guardian published a selection of such responses on Oct. 18 when Brits were called “stupid, yellow-toothed pansies” by someone in Wading River, NY.
Another respondent wrote: “We don’t need weenie-spined Limeys meddling in our presidential election. If it weren’t for America, you’d all be speaking German. And if America would have had a president then, of the likes of Kerry, you’d all the goose-stepping around Buckingham Palace.”
My favorite, penned by a Texan, goes: “Real Americans aren’t interested in your (expletive deleted) tea-sipping opinions. If you want to save the world, begin with your own worthless corner of it.”
That’s gratitude for you! Bush and Blair may be joined at the hip but the only thing that Bush supporters and most Britons have in common these days is the English language and a propensity for cloned high streets.
Far from cementing Britons and Americans, Bush and Blair have forged a philosophical, ideological, cultural and even spiritual wedge. I still remember fondly those childhood Saturday mornings when I eagerly queued outside my local cinema in Wales for the latest Hollywood matinee. In those days, Americans were our favored cousins, our heroes, epitomized by the honorable Lone Ranger and his faithful sidekick Tonto — a far cry from Bush and his own.
So saddle up Kerry! If you win, you may be in for a rough ride. The special relationship may be on its last legs but you could be the only one who can give it the kiss of life it so desperately requires. Just one thing! Remember to give Tonto the elbow he so richly deserves.
— Linda S. Heard is a specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback at [email protected]
