The man somewhat carelessly branded a 'lightweight' by Barack Obama - yes, Barack Obama, the commissar of evaporating poll leads - is now the new British Prime Minister. Considering the US President's long track record of opposing almost anything British, this will be a special relationship.
David Cameron's face is certainly a picture, or at least was when he received a phone call from the White House this morning. A beaming Barack Obama was at the other end, hoping to get the 'special relationship' back on track. That's not exactly typical of the US president, who has done everything in his power to consistently oppose British interests. The US president got something right: that the US has no closer ally than the United Kingdom. What he really meant was that his other allies put their own interests ahead of those of the US, and the UK obediently does whatever it is told. However, he'd do well to tread lightly around the Conservatives, who traditionally stand up for British interests against any opponent (Thatcher called the US out on their funding for IRA terrorists in the 1970s and 80s, and their invasion of British sovereign territory - does anyone really believe that it was an accident?). He's already called in every one of his favours, and his opposition to British sovereignty within the European Union and its continued claim to the Falkland Islands (which it was the first country to settle, and has overwhelming support from the local population to hold) is showing itself just as the magic of America's heir to Blair is beginning to wear off.
As soon as former Prime Minister Gordon Brown was the first European leader to arrive in Washington after Obama's inauguration, the rift between him and his US 'ally' was obvious. There was no White House dinner, no press conference, and Brown pretty much had to prise the door open with little assistance from those standing by, according to accounts. I'm surprised he didn't land his great clunking fist on the door and knock it through: he's not known for his tact, and, frankly, I'd have done the same thing, if I'd placed nine thousand troops in a hostile environment for reasons that had no repurcussions for Britain. Obama would go on to commit many sacriligeous acts towards the British people; throwing out a bust of Churchill being the most famous, a smart-arse comment from a senior official (who, to be fair, does know the number of countries in the world) coming a close second. He would then take the side of Argentina in a long-running dispute over the Falkland Islands, and two other British territories in the Atlantic.
Apparently, Obama gets most of ideas from a think tank, the New America Foundation. I suspect that someone has been putting bubble bath in their water filter - any fish that may once have been present are most certainly in that famous belly-up stage of their careers. This think tank claims that Britain would need to make sacrifices before Obama pays any attention whatsoever. How do three hundred killed in action - more than the total of the Falklands War - sound to the Obama administration, then? Out of a total of nine thousand soldiers on the ground, three thousand have been evacuated, another one thousand wounded in battle, another two thousand wounded off of the field. Now we are supposed to move to the neighbouring province of Kandahar - where British senior command suggested their soldiers should be deployed in the first place - so the Americans can build upon the mounds of exhausted ammunition and rubbish dumps left in Helmand Province. That's only Afghanistan; not Iraq. Our human rights record and international prestige (especially within what Bush referred to as 'Old Europe') has also collapsed as a result of support for the US. David Cameron, we owe Obama nothing. Quite the opposite, in fact.
The US president has also admitted liability for advising Merkel on saving the Euro (he wishes...) although the European Union has stated (see the Telegraph) that we will not be bailed out in the event of an economic collapse.
So, where do Barack Obama's true loyalties lie, I wonder? And, more importantly, is David Cameron going to ask him?
You need to be logged in to comment