astrapol2
03-31-2003, 07:23 AM
Blair could be one of the first victims of the war.
Quote from an article by Mark Leonard, Director of The Foreign Policy Centre
"People I speak to from Sweden to South Africa warn that Blair is now widely seen as an American poodle who puts power politics above international law. A Saudi journalist describes the exasperation: "The British are trying to be more royalist than the king. It's worse than Guam, and that's a US territory." A South African who knows Mbeki well, warns: "I've detected a major realignment, among those in power in South Africa, away from Tony and towards Jacques. We feel that Chirac is 'someone we can do business with'. Let's go for the cynical bastard who wants to rape us rather than the missionary who wants to save us". Even in sympathetic European countries the outlook is bleak: a confidant of the Swedish Prime Minister fears that they will have trouble working with Britain "now that you have put your relationship with the Americans above international law"."
(…)
First, the European dilemma: how do we avoid being seen as "roast beef-eating war monkeys" on the margins of importance? While we were trying to re-order the world, Jacques Chirac was busy vying for leadership of Europe. Chirac may have upset "New Europe" with his offensive language, but we must not delude ourselves into thinking that it is the French who are isolated. No other centre-left party in the European Union shares the position of the Blair Government. Even the right-wing governments of Berlusconi and Aznar that supported US diplomacy have not committed any troops. The French and Belgians are already planning an inner core to co-operate on defence and other areas - leaving us on the outer fringes. The danger is of Blair becoming a leader with both hands tied behind his back - unable to act in the economic realm because of his "euro problem", excluded from the political realm by his "American problem".
Second, the transatlantic relationship. Far from being a bridge between America and the rest of the world Britain is seen by many as a shadowy continuation of a "rogue superpower" - subject to all the resentment which the toxic cocktail of Rumsfeld, Cheney and Richard Perle have stirred up."
http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,925520,00.html
Quote from an article by Mark Leonard, Director of The Foreign Policy Centre
"People I speak to from Sweden to South Africa warn that Blair is now widely seen as an American poodle who puts power politics above international law. A Saudi journalist describes the exasperation: "The British are trying to be more royalist than the king. It's worse than Guam, and that's a US territory." A South African who knows Mbeki well, warns: "I've detected a major realignment, among those in power in South Africa, away from Tony and towards Jacques. We feel that Chirac is 'someone we can do business with'. Let's go for the cynical bastard who wants to rape us rather than the missionary who wants to save us". Even in sympathetic European countries the outlook is bleak: a confidant of the Swedish Prime Minister fears that they will have trouble working with Britain "now that you have put your relationship with the Americans above international law"."
(…)
First, the European dilemma: how do we avoid being seen as "roast beef-eating war monkeys" on the margins of importance? While we were trying to re-order the world, Jacques Chirac was busy vying for leadership of Europe. Chirac may have upset "New Europe" with his offensive language, but we must not delude ourselves into thinking that it is the French who are isolated. No other centre-left party in the European Union shares the position of the Blair Government. Even the right-wing governments of Berlusconi and Aznar that supported US diplomacy have not committed any troops. The French and Belgians are already planning an inner core to co-operate on defence and other areas - leaving us on the outer fringes. The danger is of Blair becoming a leader with both hands tied behind his back - unable to act in the economic realm because of his "euro problem", excluded from the political realm by his "American problem".
Second, the transatlantic relationship. Far from being a bridge between America and the rest of the world Britain is seen by many as a shadowy continuation of a "rogue superpower" - subject to all the resentment which the toxic cocktail of Rumsfeld, Cheney and Richard Perle have stirred up."
http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,925520,00.html