photo by David Katz
Overall impressions of PM Gordon Brown’s visit to Washington DC are a bit of a mixed bag, with some relief that the Special Relationship has been reaffirmed (though some still doubt) – but then there’s still plenty of grumbling about a loss of stature from the heady days of the Blair-Bush BFF phase.
A body language expert at the guardian broke down the interactions between the two, discovering the thing that most Brits take for granted, that Brown needs Obama more than the other way round, and will be the subservient partner in the special relationship.
On Brown’s speech to Congress however, the British press took pleasure at pointing out the hypocrisies of American lawmakers:
And on behalf of the Queen, he adds, “I want to announce an honorary knighthood for Sir Edward Kennedy.” The legislature of a nation founded on the rejection of such undemocratic nonsense as the British honours system bursts into tumultuous clapping Guardian
In the BBC newsroom, every time Brown was greeted by a standing ovation, a chorus of jeers would ring out around the two story mezzanine.
Other papers pointed out some perceived shortcomings in Obama’s hospitality during this visit:
While Tony Blair was invited to Camp David for dinner, an overnight stay, lunch, and more than four hours of talks for his first tete-a-tete with President George W. Bush in 2001, Mr Brown was given only a half-hour meeting and a working lunch. Telegraph
The Daily Mail complained that US papers haven’t given Brown’s visit any serious mentions. They simply do not understand that, as much as the UK press pays attention to every event going on the US (for good or ill), the favor simply is not returned across the Atlantic, as audiences tend to be much more insular.
But while they can complain that there was no “family get-together, nor did the President offer Mr Brown and his wife Sarah a star-studded White House dinner,” the Brits never fail to mention that Brown still beat out Sarkozy in getting across the finish line first.
Gordon Brown is the leader of the Labour Party, because they are in government, he has ended up representing the British people. We do not vote in a specific PM, only the party. That said, I think it is fair to say that he does not represent the majority of Brits. In fact, our electoral system is such that the Labour Party managed to get a massive majority with just 43% of the popular vote, so in fact, 57% of us voted for another party.
As the primary architect of the system that allowed our banks to get in such a mess, he is not flavour of the month and therefore, I can understand why Obama would not want to get too close. However, the British have been a steadfast ally of the United States for decades and any snub can and will be taken personally by the British. Not because we believe that there is a “special relationship”, because most of us know that this has been vastly overplayed, but because we are embarrassed that our ministers keep going to the USA and acting like love sick puppies. We are a proud nation, the UK and the USA have shared values and goals, but we want to be treated like an equal, not a bystander.
Gordon Brown is too thick skinned to notice that Obama owes him little or no respect, but Obama risks chucking out the baby with the bath water if he humiliates the British people. Friendships are easier to destroy than form, if Obama does not recognise that, then I suspect he will not be the great leader that all of America deserves and expects.
By: UK Voter on March 4, 2009
at 6:14 pm
I’m glad Congress like him, because here in England, we can’t stand him.
By: futiledemocracy on March 4, 2009
at 6:18 pm