William K. Wolfrum Chronicles

That John Bolton was the Neocon choice to be he U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. really tells you all you need to know about diplomacy to the PNAC crowd.

Here is a man whose theory of diplomacy means putting gun to someone’s head with one hand and a knife to the throat with the other. Even when that someone is a staunch ally.

‘Britain Can’t Have Two Best Friends’

Successive UK governments have taken Britain deeper and deeper into the European Union, all the while proclaiming that nothing fundamental about Britain’s status was changing. Britain is not unique in this regard. Europeans advocating an “ever-closer union” continually reaffirm that they are not changing anything fundamental about their sovereign control over foreign and domestic policy.

This attitude has been widespread, but the re-emergence of a European “constitution”–under whatever name–has brought Britain to a clear decision point. The long, slow slide into the European porridge has had few clear transition points. In the aggregate, however, the magnitude of changes in the status of the EU’s formerly Westphalian nation-state members can no longer be blinked away.

Thus, saying that the UK’s “single most important bilateral relationship” is with America, but is not comparable with UK membership of the EU, is a clever but ultimately meaningless dodge. Drop the word “bilateral.” What is Britain’s most important “relationship?” Does Mr. Brown regard the EU as a “state under construction,” as some EU supporters proclaim, or not?

The answers to these questions are what Washington really needs to know. What London needs to know is that its answer will have consequences.

…

Consider also the U.S.-UK intelligence relationship. Fundamental to that relationship is that pooled intelligence is not shared with others without mutual consent. Tension immediately arises in EU circles, however, when Britain advocates policies based on intelligence that other EU members do not have. How tempting it must already be for British diplomats to “very privately” reveal what they know to European colleagues. How does Mr. Brown feel about sharing U.S. intelligence with other Europeans?

Finally, there is Iran’s nuclear weapons programme, which will prove in the long run more important for both countries than the current turmoil in Iraq. Here the U.S. has followed the EU lead in a failed diplomatic effort to dissuade Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons. If Mr. Bush decides that the only way to stop Iran is to use military force, where will Mr. Brown come down? Supporting the U.S. or allowing Iran to goose-step towards nuclear weapons?

I will wait for answers to these and other questions before I draw conclusions about “the special relationship” under Mr. Brown. But not forever.

Remember, Bolton is not some commentator at Little Green Footballs. He was George Bush’s choice for ambassador to the U.N. And he’s making thinly-veiled threats to England. In the end, however, he’s just an outspoken part of the fringe, disturbingly sick, war-first, war-always-and-forever crowd that’s now in control of the United States. And by threatening Britain to pick between the U.S. and Europe, all he’s doing is relaying the Bush Administration’s true feelings.

–WKW

This entry was posted on Thursday, August 2nd, 2007 at 6:48 am and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.