Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Peter Hun

Britain Mocked By Us Over 'special Relationship'

Recommended Posts

US officials privately mocked Britain’s 'paranoia' over maintaining the 'special relationship', cables released by WikiLeaks suggest.

Richard LeBaron, the US deputy chief of mission, said the obsession with the alliance would “be humorous, if it were not so corrosive”.

He also reported to Washington that it would be “tempting” to take advantage of Britain’s attitude.

The documents show that senior Conservative policians met with members of President Barack Obama's administration before the election to promise a "much more pro-American" regime.

The Tories, including some who are now members of the Cabinet, promised to buy more US weapons and to "fight together" more closely in future.

The documents suggest a faint ridiculing of Britain's attitude to the US, with politicians described as "paranoid" about maintaining the "special relationship" with the US.

The Americans observed that the eagerness to maintain the political understanding "would often be humorous if it were not so corrosive" and that, in theory, the US could take advantage to "make London more willing to respond favourably when pressed for assistance".

However, the officials note that it would not be in the long-term interests of the US to do so.

The documents show that Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, met with Louis Susman, the US ambassador, in December last year and "affirmed his desire to work closely with the US if the Conservatives party wins power... adding that "we [the Tories] intend to follow a much more pro-American profile in procurement."

The cable, sent to Washington on December 10, 2009, Mr Susman continued that Dr Fox added "increasing US-UK interoperability is the key" and "expressed confidence regarding US leadership in Afghanistan and optimism about the way forward".

The ambassador reported that Dr Fox refuted claims that the Tories would be "supplicants to" rather than "partners with" the US.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8180709/WikiLeaks-Britain-mocked-by-US-over-special-relationship.html

Edited by Peter Hun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do politicians and people in the UK oppose European integration so much where at least they can be on a level playing field with Germany and France, because of losing control - but will grovel to the US know matter what they do, and allow them to control everything - I just can't figure it out - maybe its the only way to get elected.

In saying that I see france and UK military are working closer now, thats the way forward.

Edited by goldilocksporridge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duh the UK needs the USA in lots of ways. For instance the USA has our nuclear launch codes and the missiles also need their satellites to guide them. Thus we need to ask permission from them before we can even think about using them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duh the UK needs the USA in lots of ways. For instance the USA has our nuclear launch codes and the missiles also need their satellites to guide them. Thus we need to ask permission from them before we can even think about using them.

yes but where is the sense of pride - a country which once had an empire and influence around the world - now reduced to grovelling shell of its former self.

Anyway haven't the french got their own nuclear weapons, what can't the UK develop their own weapons, why do they need the US to develop them for them. I am sure if germany, france and UK all worked together they could good.

But then I suppose - the UK are looking at the long term picture, and may as well use the US as long as possible before China is the world leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do politicians and people in the UK oppose European integration so much where at least they can be on a level playing field with Germany and France, because of losing control - but will grovel to the US know matter what they do, and allow them to control everything - I just can't figure it out - maybe its the only way to get elected.

In saying that I see france and UK military are working closer now, thats the way forward.

Yes - it's funny that we align ourselves with a country that doesn't agree with free speech and finds it ok to suggest that the founder of Wikileaks should be killed.

(PS Paypal has pulled the plug on donations to Wiki. My Paypal account will be closed today)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In saying that I see france and UK military are working closer now, thats the way forward.

Which flag they be fighting under the union jack or the French All-White one?

Edited by Ruffneck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - it's funny that we align ourselves with a country that doesn't agree with free speech and finds it ok to suggest that the founder of Wikileaks should be killed.

(PS Paypal has pulled the plug on donations to Wiki. My Paypal account will be closed today)

This has been suspected for decades by most people apart from some delusional politicians.

All WikiLeaks has done is provide some confirmation.

The US does not even come that badly out of the story as they clearly find the fawning of certain members of the Uk government as embarrassing as I do.

In fact most of the cables leaked just reiterate what is already known (ie China is nervous about North Korea, Pakistan nuclear weapons are in danger of falling into the hands of Islamic extremists, Saudia Arabia and Iran are mortal enemies in the Islamic world, the US army continuously bitches about the British military, the government of Afghanistan is hopelessly corrupt etc). What next are they going to tell us. Maybe that FIFA is crooked and the World Cup bidding was rigged.

Hardly merits the witch hunt against Wiki Leaks

Edited by realcrookswearsuits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is news to anyone?

The empire is long gone, there is no special relationship, the yanks do not see us as anything but a small country has been.

The US did all they could to end empire and crippling war loan payments (only recently finished) were not the least of it.

51st state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is news to anyone?

The empire is long gone, there is no special relationship, the yanks do not see us as anything but a small country has been.

The US did all they could to end empire and crippling war loan payments (only recently finished) were not the least of it.

51st state.

Yup, I've always wondered why the British army don't charge the US for its services since the British army are pretty much mercenaries to the USA. If they paid for the ammo and deployment costs then fair enough. But we pay THEY benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These diplomatic cables are pretty low grade 'secrets' but they've done a splendid job of showing us how the media-soundbites and the reality behind the scenes are completely different.

It reveals how the media with all its cut and paste journalism from official sources is meaningless ********.

Well done, WikiLeaks. Well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duh the UK needs the USA in lots of ways. For instance the USA has our nuclear launch codes and the missiles also need their satellites to guide them. Thus we need to ask permission from them before we can even think about using them.

not forgetting we want out TOMTOMS to work so we can get to Disneyland Paris just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is news to anyone?

The empire is long gone, there is no special relationship, the yanks do not see us as anything but a small country has been.

The US did all they could to end empire and crippling war loan payments (only recently finished) were not the least of it.

51st state.

Its not even Airstrip One anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In saying that I see france and UK military are working closer now, thats the way forward.

at least with the yanks, their troops do more than their fair share of dieing. If it was the Frogs and us in Iraq, it would be our boys forming 100% of the death toll and the frogs sitting on the sidelines sipping wine and gorging on cheese.

The yanks may be a pretty bad deal for us

But The French are certainly NOT any friends of Britain. They would rather see us starve than have their farmers go without their precious subsidies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do politicians and people in the UK oppose European integration so much where at least they can be on a level playing field with Germany and France, because of losing control - but will grovel to the US know matter what they do, and allow them to control everything - I just can't figure it out - maybe its the only way to get elected.

In saying that I see france and UK military are working closer now, thats the way forward.

It hasn't taken them long to work out that most advance defence software has to be licensed from the US anyway and buying locally sourced arms at the Farnborough farmer market is far more expensive and unreliable. It leaves us without what we need while BaE work out how to put the stuff together and unable to afford what we need because it is so expensive. Perhaps we should just go and buy M16s and aircraft carriers from the Americans, rather than condemn ourselves to repeat this Eurofighter nonesense trying to pretend that we don't need the Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very poorly reported, to the point of distortion.

If you read the actual memo, it's clear that the embassy was referring to the media's paranoia and preoccupation with the special relationship, not the government. Basically they were slagging off the way the British media and self-appointed pundits get so obsessive about such matters. Yet in today's media reporting of the leak, they are conveniently not mentioning this fact, and instead twisting it to make it sound like it was HMG who were being accused of being paranoid and obsessive about the relationship, not the media themselves.

The atmospherics surrounding the relationship with the United States are always under intense scrutiny in Britain, but UK media, pundits, and parliamentarians have openly worried over the last several months that the Obama administration might downplay relations with the Brown Government.

Downing Street and the most senior levels at Whitehall never shared the level of anxiety over the future of the relationship that gripped the British punditocracy.

Although this period of excessive UK speculation about the relationship is more paranoid than usual, we agree with a senior MP who told us that ultimately, "the people who really matter in all this, those who do the serious business, know that where it matters - over defense, security issues, intelligence-sharing - the relationship is deep, ongoing and abiding."

Over the last several months much of the British press predicted a weakening, if not the outright demise, of the "special relationship."

British media and contacts are busy over-reading perceived signals for evidence of tensions in the relationship. This over-reading would often be humorous, if it were not so corrosive. Even the press coverage of Foreign Secretary Miliband's meeting with Secretary Clinton, though positive, reflected the British paranoia -- and close reading of any supposed tea leaves -- on the special relationship. The Guardian, for example, told its readers that when a UK leader visits Washington, he or she must mention the special relationship.

Downing Street and senior levels in Whitehall never shared this level of anxiety about the future of the relationship under an Obama Administration. The President's January 26 phone call to Prime Minister Brown - in which the President told the Prime Minister he looked "forward to continuing and strengthening the special relationship" -- helped quell any concerns about London's place in the hierarchy of U.S. allies. The Prime Minister's office made sure it was released to the UK press that Brown was the first European leader to speak with the new President following his inauguration. Despite these clear signals from the new Administration, the strength of the special relationship still has traction for the UK media and political class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but where is the sense of pride - a country which once had an empire and influence around the world - now reduced to grovelling shell of its former self.

Anyway haven't the french got their own nuclear weapons, what can't the UK develop their own weapons, why do they need the US to develop them for them. I am sure if germany, france and UK all worked together they could good.

But then I suppose - the UK are looking at the long term picture, and may as well use the US as long as possible before China is the world leader.

It's all a sham and 'front' they put on - UK still owns USA! Uber Elites run the countries hidden in the shadows but you need to do many hrs of research.

Start with the Pyramid (only seen from the air) in the Templegate area of London (which is legally a separate Country!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares. Britain has been a big stationary aircraft carrier and forward base of operations for America ever since they saved our bacon.

Russia beat the Nazis, at least that's what the numbers say.

The Western front was a side show, all the real action happened in the East.

However, you wouldn't guess that this was the case if you read UK and US history books

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia beat the Nazis, at least that's what the numbers say.

The Western front was a side show, all the real action happened in the East.

However, you wouldn't guess that this was the case if you read UK and US history books

Remember, the uk and us were supplying russia

I think without the american involvement things would have gone badly the other way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It hasn't taken them long to work out that most advance defence software has to be licensed from the US anyway and buying locally sourced arms at the Farnborough farmer market is far more expensive and unreliable. It leaves us without what we need while BaE work out how to put the stuff together and unable to afford what we need because it is so expensive.

Well, it would help not to find ourselves in the funnel of learned, supine helplessness in the first place. I guess it's too late now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but where is the sense of pride - a country which once had an empire and influence around the world - now reduced to grovelling shell of its former self.

Anyway haven't the french got their own nuclear weapons, what can't the UK develop their own weapons, why do they need the US to develop them for them. I am sure if germany, france and UK all worked together they could good.

Exactly. The French, for all of their faults, have no problem sticking their fingers up at the US when they dont want to blindly follow.

What on earth possesed UK to give the US our launch codes. If it suited them they could launch the weapons at London. This is especially sickening now that the special relationship is over. Obama is a world citizen, with more ties to Africa or Asia than to Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course we have a special relationship with the US. They are the prison bully and, come shower time, they like to exercise their special relationship with us.

Pass the soap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very poorly reported, to the point of distortion.

Looks like you are the one trying to distort the truth

US embassy cables: Fox outlines Conservative approach to special relationship

* guardian.co.uk, Friday 3 December 2010 23.00 GMT

Thursday, 10 December 2009, 16:48

C O N F I D E N T I A L LONDON 002768

NOFORN

SIPDIS

EO 12958 DECL: 12/09/2019

TAGS PGOV, PREL, MOPS, MARR, AF, UK, PK, IR, IN, CH, RS">RS,

SA, NATO

SUBJECT: SHADOW DEFENSE MINISTER FOX PLEDGES CLOSE U.S.-UK

COOPERATION IF TORIES GAIN POWER

Classified By: Ambassador Louis Susman for reasons 1.4 b and d

Summary

1. Shadow defence secretary tells US ambassador a Conservative government would build on special relationship with pro-American arms procurement policy. He talks positively about Afghanistan mission but predicts Iran negotiations will fail. He says Labour policies reinforce Indian view that UK foreign relations are skewed to Pakistan and says a Tory government would change this. Key passage highlighted in yellow.

2. Read related article

1. (C/NF) Summary. During a December 9 meeting with the Ambassador, Shadow Secretary of State for Defense Liam Fox affirmed his desire to work closely with the U.S. if the Conservative Party wins power in next year's general election. He highlighted the importance of the U.S.-UK Defense Trade and Cooperation Treaty insofar as it advances the goal of U.S.-UK interoperability. The Treaty "means a lot to us," Fox emphasized, adding that "we (Conservatives) intend to follow a much more pro-American profile in procurement." Fox, who accompanied Conservative Party leader David Cameron on a December 4-6 visit to Afghanistan, (septel) expressed confidence regarding U.S. leadership in Afghanistan and optimism about the way forward. (Note: In a December 8 Chatham House speech, Fox affirmed the importance of the Afghanistan mission and analyzed challenges facing NATO.) Fox predicted that negotiations with Iran would fail; he stated that the U.S. and UK should work together to prevent a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. He faulted the Labour government for policies which reinforce the Indian government's long-held view that HMG's foreign relations on the subcontinent are "skewed to Pakistan." End Summary.

U.S.-UK Interoperability

------------------------

2. (C/NF) Ambassador Susman met December 9 with Liam Fox, Shadow Secretary of State for Defense. (Mike Threadgold, Head of Fox's Private Office, and U.S. Embassy Political Officer Chris Palmer attended the meeting as notetakers.) Fox, a committed Atlanticist, underscored his desire to work closely with the U.S. if the Conservative Party wins power in next year's general election. He affirmed that when Winston Churchill first raised the notion of the "special relationship" it was as a wartime leader. The special relationship will remain strategically central to UK foreign policy regardless of which party is in power in the UK, Fox underlined. However, the relationship will be especially close in the defense sphere under Tory leadership, Fox stated. He affirmed his desire to increase joint defense procurement with the United States. Increasing U.S.-UK "interoperability is the key" since the U.S. and UK will continue to fight together in the future.

3. (C/NF) Fox stressed that the U.S.-UK Defense Trade and Cooperation Treaty (Note: SFRL hearings on the Treaty were to be held December 10) is extremely important insofar as it advances the goal of interoperability. Fox expressed appreciation for the Ambassador's update regarding the likelihood of Senate approval of the Treaty soon. The Treaty "means a lot to us," Fox emphasized, adding that "we (Conservatives) intend to follow a much more pro-American profile in procurement. The key is interoperability." Fox asserted that some within the Conservative Party are less enthusiastic, asserting that "we're supposed to be partners with, not supplicants to, the United States." Fox said he rebuffed these assertions, and he welcomed the Ambassador's reassurance that senior U.S. leaders value the UK as an equal partner.

Afghanistan

-----------

4. (C/NF) Fox, who accompanied Conservative Party leader David Cameron on a December 4-6 visit to Afghanistan (septel), expressed confidence regarding U.S. leadership in Afghanistan and optimism about the way forward. He noted that he hoped to meet with NSA Jones, Ambassador Eikenberry, and General Petraeus during the December 11-13 Regional Security Summit in Bahrain. Fox also stated that he planned to meet DASD Flournoy in Washington December 18; Fox will visit Washington and New York December 17-20. (Note: In a December 8 Chatham House speech (see paragraph 9), Fox affirmed the importance of the Afghanistan mission to the NATO Alliance and the importance of explaining to the British people with "clarity, conviction, and consistency" "what the national security threats are that compel us to be in Afghanistan." End Note.)

Iran

----

5. (C/NF) Turning to Iran, Fox observed that there are three possible outcomes in Iran: regime change, behavioral change for the regime's leaders, and "a change of leadership within

the regime." The first two options "won't happen" soon, although we could be "in the beginning of the end game." When regime change comes it will likely be a "bloody end," Fox stated. The regime's strong hold on power, its implacable hatred of the U.S. and Israel, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps stranglehold on the economy make it extremely unlikely that the regime will change from within, he said. He predicted that international negotiations with Iran would fail. He said that Iran's Independence Day in February would provide the next opportunity for the international community to evaluate the strength of Iran's internal opposition, based on the size of demonstrations. Fox stated that he had recently met with a group of wealthy, Iranian expatriates, most of whom expressed support for Iran's obtaining a nuclear bomb. "Persian nationalism" more than Islamic fundamentalism is the basis of Iranian popular support for a nuclear weapons program.

6. (C/NF) The U.S. and UK need to work together to prevent a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, Fox said. He expressed support for the establishment of a U.S. nuclear umbrella in the Middle East. Russia would play a more constructive role in regard to Iran if it began to fear "encirclement" by China and Iran. China could be more helpful under the right circumstances, Fox said. (Note: Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague told the Ambassador in a subsequent meeting (septel) that in his view China would probably not be more helpful in regard to Iran in the foreseeable future, although Russia would likely play a more constructive role. End Note.)

India-Pakistan

--------------

7. (C/NF) Turning to India, Fox criticized the Labour government for policies which reinforce the Indian government's long-held view that HMG's foreign relations on the subcontinent are "skewed to Pakistan." Fox predicted this would not be a factor under a Conservative government, since the Conservatives are "less dependent" than the Labour Party on votes from the British-Pakistani community.

NATO

----

8. (SBU/NF) During his meeting with the Ambassador, Fox touched on the future of the NATO Alliance, affirming the importance of the ongoing strategic transformation debate and the future of NATO. Fox focused on NATO in a December 8 Chatham House speech on "The Way Forward for NATO." In those remarks, Fox asserted that "NATO's mission in Afghanistan has created further debate on NATO's role and even of NATO's survival as a defense alliance." The speech highlights that "neither the financial burden nor the fighting burden is properly shared between NATO allies" and that the pending Strategic Concept should address collective responsibilities. Fox's speech affirms the importance of strategic nuclear forces to the Alliance, as stated in the 1999 Strategic Concept; the speech commits a future Conservative government to "maintaining Britain's round-the-clock, independent, submarine-based, and strategic nuclear deterrent." The speech concludes that, despite its shortcomings, NATO is a "necessity" and "in order to successfully face the threats of the 21st century, NATO is the only way forward." (Note: The full text of the speech is available at www.chathamhouse.org.uk End Note.)

Visit London's Classified Website: http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/Portal:Unit ed_Kingdom

Susman

Edited by Peter Hun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duh the UK needs the USA in lots of ways. For instance the USA has our nuclear launch codes and the missiles also need their satellites to guide them. Thus we need to ask permission from them before we can even think about using them.

You are joking of course.

You can use missles without GPS, and obviously the US doesn't control access to GPS. They could switch its off but its not the only method to navigate.

Even GLONASS if we wanted independance. Galilio will remove the dependance of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.