US is all take in the special relationship

gom

So far the UK has been there for the US. It has stood up for the US when they have said or done the wrong thing and they have been loyal allies through the thick and thin of the last 3 years especially if not the last 80 years.
Is it not time that the UK turned around and asked for something back from its partner/equal/friend?
The UK is perfectly placed to put pressure on the US on the Kyoto Protocol. The UK could insure that the US doesn't act in a protectionist manner as it will never gain from it.

I just don't get it. UK's economy is strong. It doesn't overly rely on the US for its trade unlike some countries like Ireland. Why don't British Citizens stand up and just say NO. Their special relationship or friendship is dominated. The UK truely is the poddle to the wants and wims of America. It may be there interest too but they have no say what so ever as far as I can see.

More than any other country in the world the UK is in a position to say the Bad things to the US. You should be able to tell your friend the truth. You shoud be able to tell your friend when their actions hurt you.

Because the UK seems to avoid this at all costs then I believe that the UK is nothing more than a Puppet state of the US. Even more so than Ireland is as we are just a small drop in the Global system. We can't oppose the actions of the US as that would just be like trying to fight a Gale 9 Sea Storm.
The UK on the other hand can influence the actions and directions of the US. The US likes to have the UK on its side as it helps its case. The arguement that the UK acts as a moderator on the US is a null-and-void arguement. Not once have I seen the prescence of the Uk be anything other than a PR exercise.

Why the hell are they not doing using their influenc on the US to effect real change in Britain's interest? I don't believe that an entire society (especially Britain's) can act in a wholey alturist maner to the benefit of none other than the US.... ?

gaelic cowboy

Simple reason is the UK has no INFLUENCE the special relationship just gaurantee's the UK a small share of the booty.;)

DublinWriter

The UK basically don't 'own' any nuclear weapons of their own.

All the UK's tactical nuclear arsenal is on loan from the states.

The 'Special Relationship' is basically a hang-over from WW2, then the Cold War, and operates outside of the NATO framework.

Blair knows that if he breaks the 'Special Relationship' then it's goodbye nukes, and goodbye to the UK's status of global player.

Ping Chow Chi

not quite the truth - Britian does own its own nukes, but do not own the trident missle from which they are currently deployed on.

So America could ask for the Tridents back, then Britian would have to devise another way of delivering their nukes to their target and there is a fair few nuke capable missles in the world

thejollyrodger

stupid brits.. they have got shafted in this so called "special relationship". what have they gotten out of it..
everyone thinks they are a bunch of poodels.

magick

and goodbye to the UK's status of global player

I think that happend after ww2 , if the UK tried to kick and scream at the US for something , they would pretend to listen and pay some lip service and thats it.

Its like with Iraq and its new govt Blair said it would have some power over the uk forces, where as the Bush Admin said the US army only responds to the Commander and thei......cheif.

trident missle

I though Europe has its own version of this?

I think the Uk should adopt a mind set like the French, not us nodding and going along with everything the US wants, love or hate the French at least they speak their mind and let it be known if they think their US Ally is doing something wrong.

cleareyed

I read the headline on this topic and was astonished by the ignorance of history. The special relationship was created in terrible dyas for europe and has been sustained over decades: in Ireland we have benefited from it too. (If you have to ask, don't; buy some history books and read.) The special relationship will survive Bush and Halliburton and Blair. It has survived far worse.

vorbis

this kind of thinking puzzles me. The UK to me has acted like a proper ally. Theres also the astonishing possibility that Blair believes what he is doing is worthwhile. People hold France up as an example of a proper ally to the US. This to me is ludricous. If a proper ally disagreed, they would state their objections and leave it at that. instead Chirac and co. (Schroeder included) have used the Iraqi war to continually score political points at home by decrying US policy.

magick

People hold France up as an example of a proper ally to the US. This to me is ludricous. If a proper ally disagreed, they would state their objections and leave it at that.

France at least tells the Us its concerns about the Iraq war, and since the majority of people in those nations object to the war then its good for the leaders to score politcial points, plus look at the US , i mean France and Germany arent the only ones who used sniping comments for political gain (Freedon Fries anyone?) Old Europe and New Europe, give me a break Rummy its like hes describing a product "New improved Europe ! it does what it says on the Tin , now with Xylitol !"

vorbis

the freedom fries comment was a reactionary comment to French criticism. It's still a pretty stupid comment though. The serious issue though is that France and Germany (so called allies) went to town big time on the iraq issue even though its impact on them was pretty small. Schroeder used America bashing as a cornerstone for his re-election.

ChipZilla

Originally posted by vorbis
The serious issue though is that France and Germany (so called allies) went to town big time on the iraq issue even though its impact on them was pretty small.

The Iraq issue's "impact on them was pretty small"? Are you serious? The US wanted France and Germany to get into bed with them on the invasion of Iraq, or did you forget that?

People hold France up as an example of a proper ally to the US. This to me is ludricous. If a proper ally disagreed, they would state their objections and leave it at that.

But thats the thing. Is France a military ally, a political ally, or just an ally in general? Being an ally is not being a subject state. It does not mean you have to agree with everything your allies do. France disagreed with the War for their own reasons, just as the US invaded for their own reasons. I don't see too many people complaining that the US has not been a proper ally to France, when they ignored France's objections.....

The US has always to my knowledge "used" their allies. With the exception of the European powers, its had a history of bailing on their allies when it becomes inconvenient.

gom

Originally posted by magick
I think that happend after ww2 , if the UK tried to kick and scream at the US for something , they would pretend to listen and pay some lip service and thats it.

I beg to differ. Think of the Public impact of another English specking country like the UK which is well respected in the US. Tony Blair has higher approval ratings in the US than George Bush. The US administration has to listen to the UK if it makes an objection. They may not follow it but it has a moderating effect.
The only incident in recent history were I can see the UK wield any influence over the US was when Tony Blair encouraged Bush to try for another UN resolution before invading Iraq.
It proved unsuccessful but it shows the US listens to the UK atleast some of the time.

the US can no longer rant on about how it was there when Britain needed it in WW2 and how it saved france. The US acts like the Nazis did in the war.

So far I think we all agree with the statement :

The US is all take in the Special Relationship"

Back to the topic:
"Why is it that the UK won't use the power which it has over the US?"

I believe the power system between the UK and the US is very co-dependant. The US needs the UK as a bridge to europe and out of isolation. The US knows it has a proportioanlly high level of support in the UK and this is a long-term feeling. It has much to lose if it acts against the UK's interests.
The UK should be able to twist the arm of the US president(whom ever it is in November). WHy is it that the UK has no initiative when it comes to the special relationship which is more and more like a prostitution service everyday

mike65

I dont know how anyone here can make a difinitive statement about the "special relationship" unless they know whats being said within the White House and No 10.

Anyway, there's no such thing as a special relationship only shared interests.

Mike.

gom

Originally posted by mike65

Anyway, there's no such thing as a special relationship only shared interests.

Indeed. But the government in the UK i.e. Labour is seen as wimps due to not voicing the British concern or view point. Margaret Tatcher rocked the boat when it came to the US and it had no medium or long term effect on relations between the US and UK.
It would be in the interest of the survival of Tony Blair and also Labour that the UK start to question its place in the special relationship(not the existence - just the US take all attitude)

Ping Chow Chi

I cant remember when MrsT ever voiced concerns over America ?

gom

Originally posted by Ping Chow Chi
I cant remember when MrsT ever voiced concerns over America ?

The Falklands War was a particularly tense moment in US/UK relations

mike65

Not to mention the invasion of Grenada!

Mike.

The Corinthian

While the origins of the Special Relationship are to be found in the alliance that won World War II, as a socio-political strategy it was more the product of latter twentieth century British politicians who, with the British Empire crumbling and bankrupt in the aftermath of the war, sought to tie their fortunes to the rising star of American power. One British Prime Minister and proponent of this policy, Harold Macmillan, went so far as to say that Britain should be “the wise Greeks to the bumptious Romans” (the latter referring to the US).

Overall the US has largely benefited far more from the relationship than Britain - after all, as the senior partner in the relationship it can afford to set the terms as it knows that Britain needs the relationship, for it’s political standing, much more that the US does. As a result the US has tended to be more independent than Britain; opposing Anglo-French involvement in Suez and taking her sweet time to back Britain in the Falklands War.

Of course, this does not mean that Britain has agreed with the US at every turn, her refusal to get involved in Vietnam as an example, but she has tended to give support to the US more often than has receive it.

Unfortunately, what has occurred is that this inequality in the Special Relationship - long tacitly acknowledged, was blatantly displayed by US policy in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Rumsfeld’s comments that inferred that the US ultimately did not need British military help have certainly contributed to the now increasingly popular image of the British bulldog being little more than an American poodle.

Ping Chow Chi

Originally posted by gom
The Falklands War was a particularly tense moment in US/UK relations

America offerd to loan the UK an aircraft carrier and they also supplied the RAF with the sidewinder missles that took down the enemy air force.