Subscribe to The Spectator

Monday 21 May 2012

Latest issue

Buy the current issue

Jobs at Telegraph

Lockerbie and the Special Relationship

Friday, 21st August 2009

One of the most tedious aspects of the UK-US relationship is the fretting that happens in Britain each and every time something happens that could possibly be construed as "damaging" the "special relationship". The tone of the commentary that follows or accompanies any such event always makes it clear that the sanctity of the Anglo-American relationship should have trumped all other considerations.

Naturally, the decision to let Abdebaset Ali al-Megrahi go home to die in Libya is one such example of this phenomenon. Iain Dale, for instance, has a post headlined "How will the Al-Megrahi Decision Affect US/UK Relations?" Like that's the most important issue here! One can disagree with Kenny MacAskill's decision and there are perfectly good grounds for doing so. Fearing that the Americans, no matter how reasonably, might be upset comes a long way down the list of acceptable reasons for thinking that the SNP have got this one wrong.

Because, of course, putting the US-UK relationship before everything else justifies almost anything. Nonetheless, it is striking how many British rightists seem to think that the United States should have a de facto veto over aspects of British foreign policy or, in this instance, justice.

Nile Gardiner, for instance, produces this impressive piece of weapons-grade stupidity:

If Gordon Brown had an ounce of moral fibre he would step in and reverse this scandalous decision. But no doubt a deal had been struck between New Labour and Tripoli months ago. The whole notion that the British government is powerless to intervene is nonsense and simply a smokescreen. The Scotland Act of 1998 makes it clear that Westminster still retains control over all defence and national security issues as well as foreign affairs.

There will be huge public and political outrage across the Atlantic and rightly so. Millions of Americans will be repulsed by a cynical betrayal by a lily-livered and third-rate Scottish Executive, as well as a reckless British government that has callously disregarded the concerns of its closest ally. The US-UK Special Relationship should mean something on an issue like this, but has been discarded like a rag doll on bonfire night by Downing Street and the Foreign Office. Clearly the killing of 180 Americans at the hands of Colonel Gaddafi meant nothing at all to Brown and his spineless Foreign Secretary David Miliband.

Gordon Brown cannot reverse this decision - even if he were minded to do so - because this is not a question for Westminster. That is not a smokescreen but a truth, however inconvenient. Justice is a devolved matter and was, in many respects, before the Scottish parliament was established. Previously it would have been the Lord Advocate's decision. Equally, the idea that the killing of 180 Americans (and 90 people from other, apparently less important, countries) means "nothing" is patently absurd. If that were the case no-one owuld have gone to the trouble of even having a trial.

What Gardiner really means, however, is that the Americans should have had the final say.

Then again, also writing at the Telegraph, Janet Daley rather impressively manages to construct an argument that, coincidentally, cements her view that it's all proof that Barack Obama is a weak President. Seriously.

But the important political lesson will have gone home. The President and his Secretary of State could do nothing - for all their administration’s supposed global prestige - to prevent what they considered to be an outrage. On yet another score, Mr Obama could not deliver the goods.
Note again the presumption that the United States should have been able to get its way and that Washington ought to be able to dictate policy to its allies. Like any sensible person, I think Washington's representations deserved a thorough hearing and, yes, the notion that Megrahi should have stayed in prison is far from unreasonable. But that is not the same as contracting the decision out to Washington or granting the US the power of veto.


Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article  |  Email to a friend  |  Permalink   |   Comments (37)

Post this entry to:   del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Comments Post comment

Richard Kerr

August 21st, 2009 1:36pm Report this comment

Very good posting, Alex.

Grassmarket

August 21st, 2009 1:39pm Report this comment

The Americans have a perfect right to make represntations in this situation. They could perfectly legally have insisted right from the very first hour after the attack that the whole case be conducted by the FBI and tried under US law. Instead they deferred to British sensibilities and allowed the investigation to be carried out by the Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary and tried under Scots law. As a result of which their national interest and the rights of the families of victims have been sold out by a gang of numpty bigots. They have every right to be outraged.

Cynic brackets British

August 21st, 2009 2:08pm Report this comment

That's Nile Gardiner, US citizen note. I think we can judge fairly accurately where he place Britain's interests viz those of the US in light of his decision to take up US nationality.

Steve.W

August 21st, 2009 2:55pm Report this comment

The US-UK relationship is in my opinion even more fraught than the EU-UK one. I like AM's choice of the word 'fretting', so immature. Think of another country other than the UK who would have signed up to the asymmetric extradition deal that was at the root of the Gary McKinnon case. But for the shared language the US-UK relationship would be ordinary not special and might be healthier for it.

Craig Strachan

August 21st, 2009 3:00pm Report this comment

To be fair, I don't think the noises from the Obama Administration suggest that they expected to wield any kind of veto.

Still, MacCaskill should have shown more sensitivity to the segment of U.S. opinion that matters most in this - the family members of the 189 Americans murdered at Lockerbie.

Tony E

August 21st, 2009 4:18pm Report this comment

I don't much care for the special relationship, it's a one way street these days. In fact, only one president since FDR has shown the UK any respect, (Reagan), and most of the others have used the financial debt that we owed at the end of the second world war as a lever over all sorts of policy, the most obvious example being the Empire and Suez in particular.

We need to reopen the case on Lockerbie, and find out what information is really out there in governement hands. I suspect that they know who the culprits are, Megrahi could not have acted alone.

Why won't they do it?

ndm

August 21st, 2009 7:34pm Report this comment

The Atlantic bloggers give us an idea of the impact of the decision on the "special relationship."

Andrew Sullivan's holiday subs make absolutely no mention of either the decision or the special relationship and the great man is sunning himself in Provincetown, Rhode Island seemingly immune to all the sound and fury.

British journalist Clive Crook gets all huffy about the decision and writes:

-- I would advise MacAskill not to visit the US for the foreseeable future. Indeed, calculations of justice aside, I wonder if the Scottish government has the smallest inkling of the harm it has done to its standing in the US--not to mention the prospects of future co-operation on security--with this bizarre act.

And just why should MacAskill be scared to visit the US? Of that, no mention. And just what impact will the decision have on Scotland's standing in the US? Again, no mention. This is lazy and sloppy stuff.

Megan McArdle, describing herself as "pretty liberal on imprisonment," defended the decision to friends with "Well, the British and the Scottish don't think about crime the way we do." Before quoting a big chunk of Clive Crooks post, she continues

-- But of course, that's not exactly true. Their governments don't think about crime the way we do. But individual Britons do, and Clive Crook is outraged.

But no mention of the special relationship and its now imminent demise.

The reality is that neither the American media nor the American people gives a rats ass about the special relationship. The people most concerned appear to be US-focussed British journalists who appear to think it gives them a special rise above their colleagues. (Cue Creep by Radiohead)

Craig Strachan

August 21st, 2009 10:03pm Report this comment

@ndm - Provincetown is in Massachusetts.

ndm

August 21st, 2009 11:12pm Report this comment

-- @ndm - Provincetown is in Massachusetts.

My bad - I obviously had a mental block and subconsciously decided to write Rhode Island because I knew how to spell it. Too many states. Now I have to locate Rhode Island on a map.

I was in a meeting recently in which someone displayed a map of the United States. He seemed a bit taken aback when I asked him where on the map we were. I mentioned this to an English guy last night and we pondered over how many people in Britain could place Glamorgan on a map.

Anne Wotana Kaye

August 21st, 2009 11:17pm Report this comment

As a person who lived through the Second World War, I have great respect for the United States. Presidents come and go, different policies are enacted, but the basic strength and dynamic power of the United States remains. Concerning the "Special Relationship" between Britain and the USA, I regretfully believe it hardly exists today. Reading through readers' comments in newspapers and blogs, I am disturbed to see that the USA is often even more hated and despised than the terrorists who want to destroy Western civilisation.Much of this, is, I believe pure envy mixed with the extreme Leftist stance of many British politicians. People like George Galloway, Claire Short and others of that ilk, who would be far happier as partners with the old Kremlin. The only time many will bleat that there is a "special relationship" is when help is needed, i.e. both World Wars. The USA is no longer so naive as it was in the past, and they will think twice before they send their sons and daughters to help the British out of the mess they are now digging for themselves. Obama still hasn't been in office long enough for a true assessment of his strength or weakness, but Gordon Brown is obviously a stubborm, yet weak man lead by the nose by the Scots, who mainly despise and mock him. The voice from Scotland cried out that Megrahi was released because of compassion. The truth is a far more craven word, collaboration for the short term benefit of commerce. Lord Mandelson must be smirking in his hospital bed, as he recalls his tryst with Gadafi's son in Rothschild's villa on the Isle of Corfu. That, alas, is the only Special Relationship that matters to Nu Labour Britain.

Tall Paul

August 21st, 2009 11:33pm Report this comment

The top comment to this post

http://tinyurl.com/lqtwoy

tells you all you need to know about Gardiner's agenda.

Fergus Pickering

August 22nd, 2009 4:11am Report this comment

I do hope the whole thing was a fix about oil and nothing to do with compassion, which means sticking it to the Yanks. Of course the Scotch are always sticking it to someone, something to do with an incurable inferioritycomplex. But then they ARE inferior, aren't they, no music to speak of and pretty thin literature when compared to those OTHER Celts over the water. Also the rugby's gone to pot.

Anne Wotana Kaye

August 22nd, 2009 10:21am Report this comment

Good Morning Fergus,

Where was compassion when a broken old reprobate, Biggs, was stuck away in prison? Didn't hear the bagpipes wailing for him! True Biggs hit a railway worker on the head, but his sins hardly compared to Megrahi. If Brown does have an inferiority complex, that is about the only think he's got right.

Richard Kerr

August 22nd, 2009 11:10am Report this comment

Anne W.K - I wasn't there but Ronnie Biggs didn't hit someone over the head. He was on the margins of the job and got one of the most ludicrous sentence ever for it.

Anne Wotana Kaye

August 22nd, 2009 11:53am Report this comment

Dear Richrad K

I foolishly accepted what the popular press has been writing. Whether Biggs did or didn't fell a blow, I agree the sentence was ridiculous. Also, it proves that money and property mean more here than human life. I am afraid those guys who they claim did the biggest jewellery hoist ever, will get far longer sentences than that terrorist creep.

TrevorsDen

August 22nd, 2009 1:22pm Report this comment

2only one president since FDR has shown the UK any respect, (Reagan)"

FDR negotiated with Stalin behind Churchill's back. On the other hand GW Bush offered Blair an opt out of invading Iraq if it was difficult politically.

The 'special relationship' with the USA is a result of shared intelligence and nuclear technology - dating from WW2. Its a practical relationship its long standing and by its very nature - robust.

Sam Armstrong

August 22nd, 2009 2:32pm Report this comment

I resent this desperate article. I would have hoped that the American opinion on the release of this hideous terrorist (whom is now, thankfully, going to be taken from us and hopefully to hell) would have been given kinder consideration because it is after all America's nuclear umbrella that keeps us safe at night. It is they who keep us from evil. They look after us. No-one picks on us because we have them. They look like us and speak our language. We share the same religion. They invest in our country. They consider us to be their allies. They have a respect for our ancient traditions. We love the vastness and the optimism of their traditions. I would not want to live in a world without America. Once again Mr. Massie of the basin-haircut shows what a nasty character he really is.

digbydolben

August 22nd, 2009 4:46pm Report this comment

The USA is no longer so naive as it was in the past, and they will think twice before they send their sons and daughters to help the British out of the mess they are now digging for themselves.

With all due respect to Sam Armstrong above, the person who wrote what I've quoted above is correct. Increasingly Europe--including Britain--is seen by average Americans (of both "left" and "right" colourations) as THE cultural enemy--and for very good reasons. The amounts of resentment and hatred that you dish out to us on a regular basis is palpable, and we are, historically, an isolationist people who originally wanted nothing to do with you--only to trade and to attempt to influence only by EXAMPLE. And when I say that even the "left wingers" in America are disgusted by Europeans, I mean something like what Evelyn Waugh said that "It is interesting to note the stages by which...the mild derision of an ancient civilisation for the parvenu has been transformed into the rancour of the underdog snarling at its benefactor."

I assure you that, in the future, we won't be vacationing there so often, we won't be consorting with you in business associations so frequently. We understand that not only are we hated by most of you, but those of us who are "leftists" appreciate that the "special relationship" is now so poisoned that we cannot even count on your leaders to tell ours the truth about our mistakes and misdeeds. Thatcher could at least have told Reagan that his ideas about the environment were stupid. Blair couldn't even bring himself to tell Bush that the intelligence about Iraq was fabricated.

It has become a nasty, passive-aggressive relationship, full of jealousy, resentment and spite.

Forlornehope

August 22nd, 2009 7:21pm Report this comment

The Telegraph carries an article today about Lt W Calley who served a total of three and a half years house arrest after being convicted by an American court for the killing of unarmed civilians at My Lai in 1968. There would appear to be one rule for Americans and another for everyone else. Oh, the article says that he has apologised; so that's alright then.

K Elliot

August 22nd, 2009 8:58pm Report this comment

Dead on. The americans as the junior culture are muderous and brash we should not be taking our moral lead from them but rather the reverse. Everyone in the know knows that this chap did not actually comit the attack he is a sacrificial lamb offered up by the libyans to satisfy the barbarian americans most of the Scottish families feel that this is the case and wish the poor dying man to go home. Screw american bullying and posturing and the medias over concern about it.

Craig Strachan

August 23rd, 2009 7:14am Report this comment

K Elliot: "The americans as the junior culture are muderous and brash we should not be taking our moral lead from them but rather the reverse"

There's that British inferiority complex again.

Edward McLaughlin

August 23rd, 2009 9:37am Report this comment

K Elliot

You've spoken to 'most of the Scottish families then?

Oh, and about your inoperative comma key? It would save us some deciphering time if you had it looked at.

Anne Wotama Kaye

August 23rd, 2009 9:56am Report this comment

L Elliot

This posting, condemning the 'barbarian' Americans, is filled with badly written sentences, hardly fitting a journal such as the "The Spectator". I preseume it was written in rage, and not the result of a half-baked Leftist education.

Anne Wotana Kaye

August 23rd, 2009 10:54am Report this comment

Alas, whilst critising K Elliot, I made a typing error. Proof that we are all fallible.

dearieme

August 23rd, 2009 12:39pm Report this comment

If the FBI would just round up all their citizens and politicians who supported the IRA terrorists, I'd take them more seriously.

Anne Wotana Kaye

August 23rd, 2009 1:33pm Report this comment

dearieme

Do you think the British government and its mouthpiece the BBC would be taken more seriously if it made the Balen Report public, under the Freedom of Information Act?

Richard Kerr

August 23rd, 2009 2:27pm Report this comment

Don't get me wrong Anne W.K (do you mind the abbreviation?), I'm not poking fun at you but the idea of the 'biggest jewellery hoist ever' conjures a rather different image than it should. People with ropes around Scott Fitzgeralds' diamond comes to my mind.

Sam Armstrong

August 23rd, 2009 3:18pm Report this comment

digbydolben
August 22nd, 2009 4:46pm

Thanks for that snapshot of realism. However I can assure you of some things:

1. About half of all people I know here in the UK support America, enjoy visiting America, and are grateful to be protected by the might of America. DO NOT make the terrible mistake of thinking that the author of this article represents common British values. He does not.

2. Your President has LOTS MORE in common with these lefty Euro ideals than the true American ideals, and he is a greater cultural enemy than Europe ever will be. And he was elected by 51% of your voting population. But the greatest cultural enemy is Gramscian cultural Marxism, which dominates nearly all media in the US, and is deliberately designed to unpick the fabric of the West.

3. I recently visited America (Seattle) and was bowled over by the interest in my accent, my city (London), and by tales of "how I would love to visit there". A short while after the French veto on Iraq, Americans swore they'd finished with France. Went to Paris a while ago too. Full of Americans.

I think your post was typed in a rage, and I totally understand that. It enrages me too. We are both enraged because in a worldwide context we are from the same mould, same culture, and that culture is being infected. The Anglophonic world (US, Australia, Canada, NZ, Ireland and UK plus territories) must remain united to protect our greater culture. In-fighting will play right into the hands of terrorists and their supporters.

In the 80s, Britain's Labour party wanted to get rid of our nuclear weapons. Had Mrs T not been around there would have been the chance that Labour may have gained power and disarmed us. Fortunately we had Maggie. At present there is nobody powerful or determined enough to stick up for Britain's true values, which are virtually the same as yours. So the only 'opinion' is the liberal-left one. There is no coherent Tory voice at present. So in the 80s we had someone who could show the world we were serious, but sadly today the only major gameplayers are resigned to the suicide of the West. Don't kick your cousins when they are down. We do need you still. And though you are patriotic and don't want to admit it, you do need us. The REAL us, that is. Everything that comes out of Britain now is distorted and fabricated. With a lot of hard work we will reverse that decline, and America's.

Anne Wotana Kaye

August 23rd, 2009 3:24pm Report this comment

Richard Kerr
Interesting! Of course I don't mind the abbreviation. As my usually polite late mother used to say, "You can call me what you like, just don't call me p***er! Good to keep it light sometimes.

Ray

August 23rd, 2009 4:32pm Report this comment

Ah well, looks like poor old Gary Mckinnon's goose has now been well and truly cooked!

Tim

August 23rd, 2009 7:55pm Report this comment

"That's Nile Gardiner, US citizen note."

Er, no. Nile Gardiner was born in Zimbabwe and is a British citizen.

Beefeater

August 23rd, 2009 8:03pm Report this comment

Massie likes to find excuses (tedious as they may be) to seethe at anything that suggests that Britain is America's lap dog.
Terrorism and justice aside, this is really a Dog bites Man story. Not surprising, as the special relationship between Man and Dog informs much of Massie's political thinking.

Tina Trent

August 23rd, 2009 8:53pm Report this comment

Ah yes, no point in actually focusing on that "releasing a mass murderer" thing: it's hardly the point. Tendentious media analysis is far more important. And thank goodness Mr. Armstrong has addressed the haircut.

Richard Kerr

August 24th, 2009 12:33pm Report this comment

The Saltire has been soiled by Libyan hands and it isn't a hard observation to make when you see it on the telly. However, when asked on Sunday's channel 4 news what she thought about the flag being waved to greet the convicted terrorist, the Deputy SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon couldn't bring herself to even say what she thought. No - instead she replied by saying she didn't know anyone who wasn't... blah blah.
I thought she would be proud of her flag, proud of Scotland, she's meant to be a nationalist for Christ's sake!
Brian Wilson has written a very good piece in the Saturday Telegraph, which is well worth reading. The Scottish people gave Gordon Brown a good bloody nose when they voted in the SNP, but I don't think they'd ever had thought that the party would turn round and give the country one in return.

richard bailey

August 24th, 2009 12:43pm Report this comment

I had my thoughts published in the Sunday Express yesterday in which I contributed the phrase "crocodile anger" to the english language.
In as much as it is important, the special relationship is at worst unaffected, and at best strengthened.
Much of the American reaction is simply necessary posturing for the electorate.
Scotland and America have worked together on this issue for a long time and the final chapter has been deliberately played out in August as quickly as possible.
As the Times said the other day - Clinton's words smacked of someone saying what was needed at the right volume safe in the knowledge that the decision had already been taken."
This is all about stopping the appeal, which would have damaged the US and Scotland in equal measure.

Anne Wotana Kaye

August 24th, 2009 3:49pm Report this comment

The BBC seems worse than ever. As the mouthpiece of the British government, it seems to have carte blanche to insult British values, from religion to good old fashioned straight speaking, but they will defend to the death any fanatical crank, rather than stop being politically correct. For a long time I contributed to BBC blogs, namely one run (supposedly) by Nick Robinson. Many of my postings were pulled off, for "breaking House Rules" although 99 percent of the time this was incorrect. Finally, I was banned for life, accused again of breaking House Rules and quarelling with another poster! I thought discussion was the name of the game but I was sadly wrong. The posting which brought my life-long ban was because I said Romania had the Fascist Iron Guard in World War II, and today exploit orphans, especially those from ethnic backgrounds. For these terrible words I have been banned for life. Where pray is the compassion shown towards terrorists? In "Have Your Say" a very low class blog, the BBC have manicured the statistics to show the public support releasing the terrorist to Gaddafi's loving arms. Many postings on this subject have been rejected, and mostly those those rabidly anti-American appear. So much for freedom of speech. Thank goodness for the dear, old Spectator!!

GirondistNYC

August 27th, 2009 5:11pm Report this comment

I don't think it answers to say simply that this was a Scottish legal decision as if it was clearly set in stone. Compassionate release seems to be, from everything I have read, an eminently discretionary decision. I don't think its unreasonable to expect that in making a facts and circumstances discretionary decision that the views of the UK government and the views of the nation where the majority of the victims hailed from be taken into account. That doesn't mean there should be a veto by any means, but it does mean that consultation should have been more extensive and open and MacAskill's horrible, self-aggrandizing presentation should have focused less on how uniquely merciful Scotland is and more on the specific facts that justified application of such mercy despite the reservations of many victim's families and the US government. He mentioned these it seemed to me only in passing and half-heartedly.

I think the article and some commentators are correct in pointing out that the US popular reaction is likely to be less than many UK critics of the decision assume. But I also think that there are an increasing number of DigbyDolben muppets around, and this type of crass blundering merely reinforces their prejudices. And regardless of the effect on popular opinion, it clearly negatively impacts diplomatic and intelligence community sentiment.

K Elliot: Junior Culture? Sadly true -- us Yanks are clearly not up to the high standards of, say, Millwall and West Ham fans this week. Snark aside, as to the "anyway he's probably innocent" issue, thats beside the point -- MacAskill was very clear that Scottish justice had determined he was guilty and he justified his decision as if he was guilty.

Dearieme: While the UK loathing of South Boston Provos is absolutely understandable, please read on the subject a bit. The FBI did spend alot of time investigating and prosecuting IRA gun-runners and fugitives after the very early, chaotic days of the troubles. Most Irish American politicians backed the non-violent SDLP rather than Sinn Fein. To the extent Noraid/INA existed, it existed for the same reason and on the same terms as many Islamic groups in the UK prior to 7/7 -- carefully formulating its aid as "humanitarian" and its propaganda as part of free speech. Yes, money was raised that gave aid and comfort to the PIRA, but it was also raised in Kilburn, Australia and Glasgow (to say nothing of the Republic). The perception seems to have developed that every single pound and pence, and every bullet, used by the PIRA came from America. This is simply historically wrong. Ironically given the subject at hand, Libya provided a vast trove of Warsaw pact weapons to the IRA in the 1980s.

Post comment

Back to top

Cartoons

Tag Cloud

Search this blog

Alex Massie's blog archive

sponsored links

Spectator recommends

Spectator classifieds

THE PRESENT FINDER

1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk

OLIVE BRANCH FLORISTS

Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844

RUFFS Bespoke Signet rings

62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk