Anglo-American “Special Relations”
On July 20, in the East Room of the White House, U.S. President Barack Obama and visiting British Prime Minister David Cameron held a joint press conference. Xinhua reporter Zhang Junshe:
July 20: British Prime Minister Cameron visited the United States.
Britain and America's "special relationship" with the European continent is a delicate relationship that is always worth pondering. Two months ago, the new prime minister gave his first show of diplomatic contribution to European neighbors France and Germany, aimed at repositioning the relationship between Britain and Europe. So this time has Cameron, in turn, drawn the line? Especially during such a time of discord regarding the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?
Although the main topic of Prime Minister Cameron's visit to the U.S. involves economic cooperation and all aspects of fiscal policy, public opinion generally believes that the topics of greatest concern are: BP in the Gulf of Mexico and the oil disaster, the British authorities’ previous release of the mastermind of the Lockerbie air crash, and the Afghanistan issue.
Since the BP oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico sank in April of this year, the ecological disaster caused by the oil spill has been the worst in American history. No doubt long-standing Anglo-American "special relations" are being put to the test. Voices of condemnation from Washington and vast amounts of financial compensation (paid to the Gulf area) have caused domestic backlash in Britain. Of course, for the British, BP is a major business — it is a matter of life and death regarding employment and the British pension investment issue and it may even affect economic trends. Thus, Cameron's visit to the U.S. to safeguard the interests of domestic companies, while not hurting the foundation of bilateral relations, is indeed a challenge of his diplomatic skills.
Concerning the Lockerbie incident, it has the potential to complicate the first matter. The United States criticized Britain for the release of Lockerbie mastermind Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, which was made possible by BP’s lobbying for his release. BP did this in hopes of exchanging oil contracts with Libya. A few days ago, the British government issued a new statement saying that the release of Megrahi was the wrong decision, but it claims there is no evidence that BP intervened in the matter.
Afghanistan is another heavyweight topic. Along with the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan, and under the conditions of continuously increasing casualties and injuries, the British government apparently intends to shorten the timetable for the withdrawal by one year so that by 2014, most of the “combat power” will be withdrawn. But whether or not this plan can be fit in with Washington's plan has yet to be seen.
Whatever the problem, Britain's Prime Minister Cameron, the youngest prime minister in almost 200 years, will no doubt have his diplomacy put to the test. In particular, although the Anglo-American “special relations” were created over a long period of time — through such factors as the same language, the same culture and also through fighting alongside each other in World War II — the Labour Party is different. At the time Cameron was running for office, and after he took office, he criticized the Labour Party for blindly following America. Instead, Cameron thinks, the relationship between the United States and Britain should be defined as "solid, but not slavish." Now, in the face of so many problems and pressures, how can the young British leader handle this "special relationship?" How can he find a policy that balances Britain between being "strong" and not "blindly following the U.S.?" I am afraid this will become the focus of waiting and watching.
July 20: British Prime Minister Cameron visited the United States.
Britain and America's "special relationship" with the European continent is a delicate relationship that is always worth pondering. Two months ago, the new prime minister gave his first show of diplomatic contribution to European neighbors France and Germany, aimed at repositioning the relationship between Britain and Europe. So this time has Cameron, in turn, drawn the line? Especially during such a time of discord regarding the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?
Although the main topic of Prime Minister Cameron's visit to the U.S. involves economic cooperation and all aspects of fiscal policy, public opinion generally believes that the topics of greatest concern are: BP in the Gulf of Mexico and the oil disaster, the British authorities’ previous release of the mastermind of the Lockerbie air crash, and the Afghanistan issue.
Since the BP oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico sank in April of this year, the ecological disaster caused by the oil spill has been the worst in American history. No doubt long-standing Anglo-American "special relations" are being put to the test. Voices of condemnation from Washington and vast amounts of financial compensation (paid to the Gulf area) have caused domestic backlash in Britain. Of course, for the British, BP is a major business — it is a matter of life and death regarding employment and the British pension investment issue and it may even affect economic trends. Thus, Cameron's visit to the U.S. to safeguard the interests of domestic companies, while not hurting the foundation of bilateral relations, is indeed a challenge of his diplomatic skills.
Concerning the Lockerbie incident, it has the potential to complicate the first matter. The United States criticized Britain for the release of Lockerbie mastermind Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, which was made possible by BP’s lobbying for his release. BP did this in hopes of exchanging oil contracts with Libya. A few days ago, the British government issued a new statement saying that the release of Megrahi was the wrong decision, but it claims there is no evidence that BP intervened in the matter.
Afghanistan is another heavyweight topic. Along with the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan, and under the conditions of continuously increasing casualties and injuries, the British government apparently intends to shorten the timetable for the withdrawal by one year so that by 2014, most of the “combat power” will be withdrawn. But whether or not this plan can be fit in with Washington's plan has yet to be seen.
Whatever the problem, Britain's Prime Minister Cameron, the youngest prime minister in almost 200 years, will no doubt have his diplomacy put to the test. In particular, although the Anglo-American “special relations” were created over a long period of time — through such factors as the same language, the same culture and also through fighting alongside each other in World War II — the Labour Party is different. At the time Cameron was running for office, and after he took office, he criticized the Labour Party for blindly following America. Instead, Cameron thinks, the relationship between the United States and Britain should be defined as "solid, but not slavish." Now, in the face of so many problems and pressures, how can the young British leader handle this "special relationship?" How can he find a policy that balances Britain between being "strong" and not "blindly following the U.S.?" I am afraid this will become the focus of waiting and watching.