US Adviser slams Cameron's Euroscepticism

[Wildcat]

Former adviser to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama slams Cameron's Euroscepticism as extremist saying it will lose britain international influence.

 

Bill Clinton would always try and stop Democrats from making false choices. This was an important political lesson that served his presidency well. Today, in the United Kingdom, of the three main parties it is only the Conservative Party that has fallen into the false choices trap. And, they have done so on a fundamental issue of British foreign policy: whether to be Atlanticist or pro-European.

 

To present Atlanticism and Europeanism as incompatible options is to fundamentally misunderstand the future of transatlantic politics in the modern world.

 

The rise of China and the ever-growing importance of emerging economies such as India and Brazil have changed the calculus of global politics. Europe should remain an important partner for the United States in the years to come. We share similar values, interests, and world views. We have been long-time allies for a reason. But, while Britain has traditionally been our privileged partner across the Atlantic, it is questionable whether this could be sustained should the country turn its back on the European project. America’s “special relationship” needs to be with a Britain that is at the heart of, and making the case for reform and openness in, the European Union.

 

Some in Britain now claim the special relationship between our two countries is little more than a too-cozy rapport between our nation’s leaders. That is a great shame, because in fact the ties that bind us are much deeper and built on a shared intellectual and cultural heritage and a willingness to lead. It was the ideas of John Maynard Keynes and George C. Marshall that helped our two countries shape the post-World War II era, securing the prospects for peace and prosperity in the decades that followed.

 

Half a century later, that same spirit and our common vision of an open and peaceful Europe spurred President Clinton to work with the governments of John Major and Tony Blair to help ensure the expansion of democracy and human rights extended to all Europeans. What is needed now is continued British leadership in Europe so that the aspiration of membership of the European Union remains open to countries from the Baltic to the Bosporus.

 

Worryingly, under David Cameron’s leadership, the Conservative Party’s traditional Euro-skepticism has become more extreme. Consider, for example, his decision to have Conservative members leave the European People’s Party—the mainstream center-right grouping within the European Parliament that includes German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats and French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s UMP—to form a new parliamentary group with a maverick collection of racist, homophobic, and xenophobic members of the European Parliament. Beyond the obvious political symbolism this entails—it is hardly good for Britain’s prestige when its European parliamentarians sit with those who have argued the election of a black U.S. president hails the end of civilization—the decision also illustrates Cameron’s willingness to forgo political influence to placate extreme elements of his own party.

 

The Conservatives are now very likely to punch below their weight in European debates, leaving others to shape the future direction of the EU. Moreover, pledging to "repatriate" powers to Britain—a commitment that will require the unanimous consent of all 27 EU governments—Cameron’s Conservatives look set to expend what little influence they will have on counterproductive and unachievable measures rather than positive steps forward.

 

U.S. frustrations with the pace and nature of EU decision making aside, the United States has an interest in a Europe that is open and not protectionist, in a Europe capable and willing to shoulder greater responsibility on the world stage, and in a Europe that pursues internal economic reform to ensure market integration remains a catalyst for growth. While the appointment of a president and foreign representative of the European Council are important institutional improvements, these posts are in their infancy. Institutional reform is also no guarantee of policy coherence. American hopes for a more dynamic and equal European partner are still much less likely to be realized if Britain is on the fringes of the debate about the future of the union.

 

The shared challenges we now face require effective multilateralism not outdated bilateralism or unilateralism. Over the last year, it was the hitherto unprecedented levels of multilateral policy coordination that prevented the financial market collapse on Wall Street from plunging the global economy into an economic depression similar to that experienced during the 1930s. Prime Minister Gordon Brown and President Obama led that international response through a commitment to concerted and co-coordinated economic stimulus packages—an approach the British Conservatives openly opposed. But, the economic recovery they engineered is still fragile. Strong leadership is required to ensure we stay the course, and that the recent growth witnessed in European and global economies continues.

 

Looking to the challenges ahead, one also has to question what role David Cameron will be able to play in shaping the EU’s policies toward China and the emerging economies when it comes to mitigating the effects of potentially catastrophic climate change. Nor do we know if a Cameron-led government could be an effective advocate when it comes to convincing other European partners to take seriously their responsibilities for providing additional forces, trainers, and financial and political backing for our joint efforts in Afghanistan. On both climate and security, Cameron's Conservatives may have respectable views and policies. What is now in question is whether they will have the political heft in Europe to be an effective ally of the United States. It’s a question that today is making the Washington policymaking community more than a little anxious.

 

John D. Podesta is President and Chief Executive of the Center for American Progress.

 

 

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/04/british_election.html

 

They will basically turn Great Britain in to Little Britain.

[HeadingNorth]

Remind me again why we need, or want, international influence. Most European countries have lived happily for decades without having any at all.

[brianthedog]

If I wanted advice regarding internation policy I'd probably not start looking for it in the US.

[Harleyman]

Looks like the British Conservatives are a clone of the American Republicans or vice versa

[Bedders]

It's a one sided relationship anyway! We will always need to be friends with the USA as our social & economic values are similar, but we shouldn't be the USA's puppet!

 

We've helped along with Iraq & Afganistan, but where were the USA with our long & bloody battle with terrorism in Northern Ireland for the best part of 30 odd years? Now Mr Obama doesn't want to get involved with the issue that is rearing it's head over the Falkalands.

 

We help them & when it suits & the boot is on the other foot they want to suddenly become Switzerland (Neutral) ??? :suspect:

 

When it boils down to it how much have USA made from the UK by us being their 'friend'? Do you think we will get all the lucrative rebuilding contracts in Iraq & Afganistan.....or companies from the USA?

 

As for the initial point you are raising, we are the poor relations in Europe. As not being a founder memeber our contributions are way higher than most other nations of a similar sized populus. Do we want to end up like Greece?

 

Anyyone seen Ross Kemp Battle for the Amazon yet? Texaco's alledged legacy of dumping oil all over parts of cleared rainforest when doing initial exploration, & chopping down the rain forest in search of oil in general , is not something us from the western developed nations should be really proud of! If that means not snuggling up to the 'Americans' quite as much, it's a price I'm willing to pay!!!

[Harleyman]

It's a one sided relationship anyway! We will always need to be friends with the USA as our social & economic values are similar, but we shouldn't be the USA's puppet!

 

We've helped along with Iraq & Afganistan, but where were the USA with our long & bloody battle with terrorism in Northern Ireland for the best part of 30 odd years? Now Mr Obama doesn't want to get involved with the issue that is rearing it's head over the Falkalands.

 

We help them & when it suits & the boot is on the other foot they want to suddenly become Switzerland (Neutral) ??? :suspect:

 

 

Didn't president Clinton play an active part in bringing the two sides together for the initial peace talks on Northern Ireland?

 

Ireland and it's politics have always been a sensitive subject in America because such a large segment of the population trace their ancestry to that country and there was until recent years a legacy of hatred against England amongs Irish-Americans caused by historical events

 

Where was Britain during the years of the Vietnam conflict? This war was fought when Britain, the rest of western Europe and the US saw communism as the major threat to freedom and democracy.

Harold Wilson' government chose not to intervene

 

Sovereign nations have the right to exercise their policies as they see fit and without regard to relationships with allies or non-allies

[Bedders]

Didn't president Clinton play an active part in bringing the two sides together for the initial peace talks on Northern Ireland?

 

Ireland and it's politics have always been a sensitive subject in America because such a large segment of the population trace their ancestry to that country and there was until recent years a legacy of hatred against England amongs Irish-Americans caused by historical events

 

Where was Britain during the years of the Vietnam conflict? This war was fought when Britain, the rest of western Europe and the US saw communism as the major threat to freedom and democracy.Harold Wilson' government chose not to intervene

 

Sovereign nations have the right to exercise their policies as they see fit and without regard to relationships with allies or non-allies

 

Didn't the Americans kick our arse over Suez? We'd probably got the blog on?

[Harleyman]

Didn't the Americans kick our arse over Suez? We'd probably got the blog on?

 

Suez was about the right of the Egyptians to own the canal. Nasser of Egypt had support throughout the Arab world when he seized control of it and British PM Anthony Eden screwed it all up anyway by doing a sneaky deal with Israel whereby the Israeli army seized the Gaza strip and then Eden using the excuse that he had to send troops to Egypt to stop a possible war between Egypt and Israel but really to take back control of the Suez canal.

 

Very few people supported the war anyway. As a kid I remember someone had painted "Stop Eden's War" in great big white letters above Five Arches just up the road from the Wednesday ground

[Stormy]

Former adviser to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama slams Cameron's Euroscepticism as extremist saying it will lose britain international influence.

 

 

 

They will basically turn Great Britain in to Little Britain.

 

Calling Euroscepticism "extremist" is a very dangerous thing to do. For a start, its complete nonsense. For another thing, just like the racist stone which I have briefly discussed in another thread just as ridiculous as this one, it devalues what should be an important term. Increasingly one hears "extremist" used to describe someone whose views are not the same as those dictating to us what they say we should think. Why should we not question the EU and the way we are governed by it? Tell me Wildcat, should we simply roll over and accept what our Brussels kings and queens tell us? Do you agree with everything about the EU and the way it is run? Do you like the undemocratic way it rules? If we must go around using unnecessary language such as "extremist" then I would argue that the undemocratic nature of the EU is the only "extremist" thing around here.

 

Your devotion to the EU and your inability to question the ruling class is pretty bizarre in an innocent, naive kind of way, but your disregard for anyone else who dares question it is frankly disturbing.

 

 

And lets not forget UKIP beating Labour and the Lib Dems in the Euro elections last year. Thats an awful lot of extremists

[Vague_Boy]

Former adviser to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama slams Cameron's Euroscepticism as extremist saying it will lose britain international influence.

 

Interestingly, had we joined the Euro, we would be in exactly the same bind that Greece is in now.

 

No quantitative easing for a start (against the rules).

 

Still, we're not really that much better off now. It's just a matter of time.