“He might not have been the easiest of allies, but an ally he has been.”
That’s the verdict of the Daily Telegraph in an editorial to mark President George W. Bush’s farewell tour of Europe.
Despite concerns over issues such as Iraq, the economy and extradition treaties, Bush was “never disloyal or ungrateful”, the paper said.
He acknowledged Britain’s unparalleled support after the Sept. 11 attacks, the newspaper noted. And Bush backed Britain over Northern Ireland and the Israeli-Palestine roadmap, the paper said.
“A country, like a man, can have friends who are difficult. But sticking to them is the essence of friendship,” the paper said.
The Independent wasn’t quite so gracious.
It featured a cartoon of Bush, caricatured as a duck with a leg in plaster and carrying a crutch, greeting Gordon Brown, portrayed with a large beak and tail feathers. The pair are standing next to the bony corpse of the dove of peace under the caption “Rendezvous”.
Bush says to Brown: “The Dodo of Downing Street - Yo!.” Brown replies: “The Lame Duck of the Lone Star State, I presume?”
The tabloid Daily Mirror went further.
“Goodbye and good riddance,” it said in an editorial.
“He has been one of the worst presidents in American history,” it said. “His shameful legacy can be summed up in one word: Iraq.”
Some commentators suggest the historic “special relationship” between London and Washington has changed for good since the departure of Tony Blair.
One media report said diplomats have stopped using the phrase, preferring instead the term “close bilateral relationship”.
Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has spoken of the need to “recalibrate” the relationship to make the two sides more equal.
With Bush leaving the White House soon, where do you see Anglo-U.S. relations heading?
Trackback
8 comments so far
The “special relationship” is a product of the shared political and social values of two free and independent countries and it does not rely on individuals or treaties to sustain it.
It will fail if and when the UK becomes a full member of the EU, because the UK will no longer be an independent country and its foreign policy will be dictated by the EU. With the EU already becoming militarily ambitious and the UK compelled to support whatever EU Armed Force is eventually put together, it is conceivable that UK and US troops could in the relatively near future find themselves on opposite sides of a conflict in some obscure part of the world.
- Posted by Mike TOne need only consider the sheer amount of shared history to determine that the “special relationship” will survive. Quite a few Americans (myself included) are inclined to hope that this relationship is strong enough to outlast even the worst of Bush’s transgressions.
- Posted by Joshua EstellThis relationship will be extended into Europe. Look at Merkel and Sarkozy, whose … do they lick? This is one reason for the extension of Europe-to make it America’s lackey against Russia etc.
- Posted by RuthBush is politically finished - his bizarre goodbye tour viewed with a healthy good riddance, tacit contempt and a rather large anount of slightly taciturn indifference. Has Laura been useful? She certainly had the nose for it - but we saw that action on Youtube.
What Bush did for the special relationship was echoed in the plot of the movie ‘Double Indemnity’. As Mrs Dietrichson, Bush, but not sporting a blonde wig came to a sticky end surrounded by a miasma of deceit, gaffes, gung-ho policies, innuendo and human rights abuses. The Fred McMurray insurance salesman role was taken by Blair, and it was Blair who went down with Bush, roasted by the fires of vanity and vain reacionary ideology.
It was a kind of love affair based on some kind of dirty deed, and it went horribly wrong.
And when Bush’s enduring legacy is all wrapped-up in Guantanamo Bay, we can be sure it was a twisted plot indeed.
Oh well - alls well that ends well, aye? But maybe not with the Bush legacy…
- Posted by The Truth Is...A special relationship with Bush has meant supporting an illegal war in Iraq; supporting a war against the legitimate Hamas govenment; supporting an attack on Afghanistan because the US was unable to persuade the Taliban government (whose victory against the Russian occupation was sponsored by the US) to swap a Slav master for a Wasp master; it\’s meant pretending that Israel doesn\’t really have nuclear weapons but that if she does, that\’s no reason for Iran to worry that someone is going to attack the second axis of evil (the third axis is safe since it does have the bomb). The only hope I guess is Obama — Billary wants to \”obliterate\” Iran; McCain wants to have Iraq as a permanent suburb of the Pentagon. But, not to worry about that: Hillary\’s remark about Robert Kennedy should give a few ideas to her \”white male working class American\” supporters\” At least we can be thankful that the US has a good democratic gender- neutral country like Saudi Arabia — there\’s a special relationship the US can be proud of. Anyone else looking for friendship and democracy with a gun at the end? Gordon???
- Posted by geoffreyGeoffrey
The Special Relationship will endure as long as Britain retains her essential self. As we become ever more European, ever more Islamic and multicultural, ever more leftist, we drift apart from America. If the relationship fails it will not be because one leader is unpopular or difficult, but because our interests, based on our principles have changed. I hope it will not be so.
- Posted by DevonFor all the constant criticism that America takes for being a difficult, domineering, uncultured, unsophisticated bully of an ally, it isn’t America who questions her special relationship with Britain on a continual basis. America’s commitment to British security and the special relationship is as strong as ever. But why shouldn’t America question her commitment to Britain? What does America receive but constant backbiting, accusations, and threats to end the relationship if Britain is unhappy or feels unappreciated? Despite all the rhetoric about Bush dragging Britain into a war, one might recall that the ‘special relationship’ began with Winston Churchill doing everything he possibly could to drag America into the war against Germany. If the benefits of the alliance are so unclear, and/or Britain no longer wishes to shoulder the burdens as well as enjoying the benefits of being America’s premiere partner in world affairs, I have no doubt there are plenty of other countries who would be willing to fill the role. Nicolas Sarkozy seems to agree. How Britain would benefit from becoming just another EU dominated state without its historic leverage with the U.S. is not apparent.
- Posted by RobertYes and that ’special’ relationships continues with special gifts such as the sub-prime crisis and bullish demands to Brown to not leave Iraq.
Very special my aspidistra!
- Posted by The Truth Is...