Britain and America

America still accounts for half of world defence expenditure

A special report in this week's Economist contains interesting data on the strength of the US military compared with other nations but it also warns that it is facing acute pressures.

The graphic above shows that the US accounts for approximately half of all global defence expenditure.  Its share of defence expenditure is disproportionate to its share of world GDP and ten times greater than its share of world population.

Britain is the second biggest spender although the strength of its armed forces (200,000) is much, much smaller than China (2.3m), India (1.3m) and Russia (1m) - see graphic on the right.

The Economist article notes that the USA will struggle to undertake any other major military operation because of its commitments in the Middle East:

"These days American units get nothing like the recommended 2:1 ratio of dwell time to deployment. Some army brigades currently get barely a year to rest and re-train after serving 15 months, a ratio of 0.8:1. By this measure, American ground forces get a fifth as much rest as their British counterparts—and British commanders say that anything less than two years at home for each six-month deployment (a 4:1 ratio) could “break the army”."

Robert Gates, the Defence Secretary, is planning a 62,000 personnel increase in America's ground forces.  This approximate 10% increase is only likely to be possible however with an increase in remuneration (for officers, in particular, where shortages are most pressing) and a reduction in standards:

"The quality of new recruits is starting to drop, with more in the lowest aptitude ranking, more high-school dropouts and more receiving waivers from disqualification (for example, for using drugs or having a criminal record). The age limit for recruitment has risen from 35 to 42, while fitness levels are lower. Some complain that training standards have also suffered, as the army adopts gentler means to get more recruits through boot camp."

Related link: UK defence spending at lowest level since 1930s

Malloch Brown's appointment to Foreign Office signifies shift away from Blair's foreign policy

One of the most controversial appointments in yesterday's announcements of Gordon Brown's first Government was that of Mark Malloch Brown as a foreign minister with responsibility for Africa, Asia and the United Nations.  He is pictured above entering 10 Downing Street with Labour's new Deputy Leader Harriet Harman.  Ms Harman has called for the Labour Party to apologise for the Iraq war.

Malloch Brown, now elevated to the House of Lords, was a leading critic of the Iraq war and only one month ago told BBC Radio that Tony Blair had been "blinded" by morality in his Middle East policies.

When he was chief of staff to former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan he attacked the United States media and government for allowing “too much unchecked UN bashing and stereotyping”.  John Bolton, US Ambassador at the time issued a furious statement to Malloch Brown's then boss, Annan: “I’ve known you since 1989 and I’m telling you this is the worst mistake by a senior UN official that I have seen in that entire time."  The Heritage Foundation issued this response at the time.

A leader in today's Times is strongly critical of the appointment:

"It was a mistake to appoint the ennobled Mark Malloch Brown to serve with him at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. This self-promoting former Deputy UN Secretary-General has made some crude public remarks about the US Administration along with the slightly unhinged assertion that the UN’s failure to act decisively on Darfur is partly the fault of the US and UK for invading Iraq. It will be interesting to see what is uncovered by investigations into the UN Development Programme under his tenure."

A number of critics of the Iraq war have returned to Government under Prime Minister Brown.  In addition, David Miliband, the new Foreign Secretary and Lord Malloch Brown's new boss, was always sceptical of the Iraq war and was critical of Israel's actions last summer during the Lebanon crisis. 

Although the public position of the Brown administration has yet to change the ministerial appoointments suggest a decisive shift away from the worldview of the Blair era.

5pm update: The Spectator's Matthew d'Ancona has written this about the appointment: "What is certainly apparent already is that a few dog whistles on Iraq, particularly the dreadful appointment of Mark Malloch Brown to the FCO, will do nothing to prevent such atrocities. It is psychologically easier to believe that the Islamists hate us because of Iraq, but it is also nonsense. The Birmingham plot of 2000 makes that plain enough, as does the fact that terrorists have been arrested in Canada and France, countries which both opposed the war."

Saturday update: Mark Steyn's reaction

Will the relationship be less special after Blair?

The Thatcher Center's Dr Nile Gardiner has written a typically erudite piece for National Review on the need to preserve the transatlantic relationship post-Blair. His main points are below:

The U.S. government must prioritise the survival of the relationship:

"There are major challenges on the horizon, including the stunning rise of anti-Americanism in Britain, growing attempts by the al Qaeda network to break the alliance, as well as the continuing loss of British sovereignty in the European Union. The relationship cannot be taken for granted, and protecting and defending it should be a top-level priority for the U.S. government."

On polls showing worrying levels of anti-American attitudes and misconceptions amongst British people:

"They reflect a commonly held, though hugely unfair view among the British public that Britain under Tony Blair has become America’s “poodle,” receiving nothing in return. Blair’s unyielding support for President Bush perversely weakened the prospect of future British leaders standing shoulder to shoulder with the United States. His successor, Gordon Brown, will be heavily dependent upon the traditional socialist Left of the ruling Labor party for support, and will be under pressure not to emulate the close Bush-Blair partnership."

Brown will have to pander to his party:

"A frequent visitor to the United States, Brown’s instincts are far from anti-American, but those of his party certainly are. He will undoubtedly seek to create some distance between Washington and London, and will prioritize ‘soft’ issues, such as international development, foreign aid, and global warming. The high-profile, flashy public press conferences that were a regular feature of the Washington political scene when Blair was prime minister, are likely to replaced by low key, but tougher behind the scenes negotiations, with Brown cutting a far less dashing figure on the world stage."

Al Qaeda will turn the screw on the relationship:

"More attacks on U.K. interests in the Middle East and Africa, as well as bombing campaigns on British soil are likely. Though it failed with the July 7, 2005 London bombings, partly due to Blair’s strong response, al Qaeda will attempt to recreate the “Madrid effect” in Britain. Al Qaeda will also seek to foster political tensions between London and Washington by cultivating British-based Islamic terror cells to act against transatlantic targets."

Younger Americans lean left

A survey in today's New York Times suggests that Americans aged 17 to 29 are more likely to be supportive of gay rights, open borders and socialised medicine.  They are equally concerned about global warming and share similar attitudes on abortion.  Click on the graphic on the right to enlarge it and view the summary of the findings.

George W Bush salutes Tony Blair on his final day as Prime Minister

Tony Blair ceases to be Prime Minister today and his last 24 hours in power have had a decidely American feel to them.  He met Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in Downing Street yesterday to discuss climate change issues and there is much talk of him spending much of his 'retirement' on the US lecture circuit.  He is expected to command a fee of $150,000 per appearance and will probably speak at least once or twice a month in the USA over the next year.  He leaves Downing Street heavily in debt and with mortgages for five properties.

The clipping above is from the front page of The Times.  The Times also reports that Tony Blair is likely to be The Quartet Powers' Special Envoy to the Middle East.

George W Bush's tribute to Tony Blair appears on the front page of The Sun, Britain's best-selling newspaper.  The Sun publishes a sixteen page tribute to the outgoing Prime Minister.  Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Bono and Governor Schwarzenegger are amongst the contributors.  Here are some key extracts from the President's interview-based article for The Sun:

"We've served together during a time of war, and shared the same determination to succeed.  We analysed the enemy the same way, and found each other in the same foxhole.  I admire somebody who sees over the horizon.  In this job, and in his job, you've got to see beyond the immediate if you intend to lay a foundation for peace.  Tony and I have had great and long discussions about the threats the civilised world faces.  He fully understands the nature of the enemy.  He sees this as an ideological struggle, and he knows that those of us blessed by the ideology of liberty, that has led to great comfort for our respective peoples, must help others realise the benefits of that."

"This is the beginning of a long ideological struggle, where Tony Blair and I are writing the first chapters of the war, probably the dominant war of the 21st Century."
 
"Tony's great skill, and I wish I had it, is that he's very articulate.  I wish I was a better speaker.  This guy can really talk!"

“Tony’s had a great run and history will judge him kindly. He’s a very talented man, for whom I’ve got a great deal of respect. I selfishly said to him, ‘I hope you can stay out my term!’  But Tony has been very gracious about Gordon Brown to me.  Gordon came here and he wasn’t the image of the dour Scotsman at all! He was relaxed. It was a good meeting.”

Mr Blair may have a friend and admirer in President Bush but the final opinion poll of his era suggests that only 14% of voters want the next generation of British politicians to embrace Blairism.

Related link: What will Brown mean for the special relationship?

1pm update: Fast record of Tony Blair's final PMQs

The ‘Big-Mo’ is with Mitt Romney!

Tim Aker, Grassroots Co-ordinator for the British TaxPayers' Alliance, believes Romney is the man with the momentum.

If you throw enough money at something, will the problem go away?  It will if you’re Willard Mitt Romney, the former Governor of Massachusetts and someone who is, clearly, the front runner for the Republican Presidential nomination.  The momentum is with Mitt Romney – and it could carry him through the primaries to the White House.

Look how far he’s come.  Romney’s campaign flagged at the outset.  His polling was risible – matched by his poor national standing.  Videos flooded YouTube with Romney’s sound-bites supporting abortion and extending gay rights.  Soon the self-appointed champion of social conservatism faced the ire of leading social conservatives horrified that he tried to out-liberal Ted Kennedy in his 1994 Senate race.  Pundits immediately coined the phrase ‘Mitt-flop’ and conservative pressure groups set out to demonize him as a liberal, a RINO (Republican in name only).

Yet after three debates, millions of dollars spent and a flood of polls, Romney is climbing.  Not only that, he has soared in the early primary states.  Recent polling in Iowa, New Hampshire, Utah and Michigan has Romney leading by 10% on average.  While his national polling may only hover above 10%, leading in the early primary states sets him up for surviving well into Super Tuesday.  Remember, most commentators say there are three tickets out of Iowa and only two out of New Hampshire.  Romney leads impressively in both.

So how has this turn around in fortunes come about?

The virtues of poodledom

Andrew Sullivan wrote an interesting piece for The Sunday Times this weekend about the advantages to Blair, and Britain, of being "a poodle" to Bush:

Poodles have a good life - "Poodle owners are often passionate about their pets, catering to their every whim, manipulated by their guile and tolerating their sometimes snippy relationships with other dogs. In many cases – and this is not restricted to poodles, of course – it’s hard to tell, after a while, who controls whom. The master routinely finds his days wrapped around catering for the poodle: walking it, grooming it, pandering to it. If the tail often wags the dog, the dog can also wag the human."

British PMs accept that power comes with poodledom - "Most postwar British prime ministers have intuitively understood this, however strongly their publics have sometimes balked.  The global power of a British premier is nowhere near that of an American president, but the Brits’ leverage over such power is arguably greater than any other country’s – precisely because of their treasured, special, pampered poodle status."

It doesn't have to be an unquestioning relationship - "Recall Thatcher’s horrified response to what she saw as a breach of international law in the seizure of Grenada, a member of the Commonwealth, or her opposition to Reagan’s attack on nuclear deterrence theory at Reykjavik – and compare it with Tony Blair’s take on international law with respect to Iraq. Britain’s leaders – from Thatcher to Blair – do not seem to be moving away from the American orbit, but more firmly into it."

Making Blair an envoy to the Middle East suits everyone - "But what makes this perfect for Blair is the combination of almost certain failure, the patina of altruism and a sense of global self-importance... And that’s why, for all the pitfalls of such an appointment, it’s hard to see why it would be bad for Britain, or bad for Gordon Brown. It gets Blair out of the way and makes Britain seem more important on the world stage. Poodling is a much more powerful tool in global power politics than preening like the French or pouting like the Russians."

Sullivan's definition of poodledom has its appeal. The common jibe that Blair is a poodle for signing up for Iraq out of slavish obedience to Bush is nonsense - he was a liberal interventionist when Bush was still an isolationist.

Declaration of Annexing the British Isles as part of the USA

Last week we posted the famous "Petition to Revoke the Independence of the United States of America". As promised, here's one of the most popular rebuttals:

"To the imperialist British colonizers.

In the light of your indecision over joining a common European Currency, your dissatisfaction with the European Union, your bickering with European Governments and the fact that you already almost speak our language and refuse to speak any other European languages, you are to be annexed as a State of America. Your state code will be GB. Zip codes will be assigned to replace your old postal districts. The state capital will be Stratford-upon-Avon which is a lot prettier than London. Princess Diana will be declared a saint. You have already assimilated so much American culture that you are unlikely to notice the transition. To aid in the assimilation, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

1. Look up "aluminum" in any good American Dictionary. Check the spelling and pronunciation guide. We discovered it, we named it, you are mispronouncing it. Learn to live with it. You are, of course welcome to your idiosyncratic and illogical place-names such as Edinburgh, if you wanted it pronounced 'Eddinburra' you have spelled it that way in the first place. You will quit using words such as "fortnight". The correct term is "a two week period". You will learn words such as "credenza", "intern" and "chad".

2. There is no such thing as "UK English". UK English is the relic of a defunct colonialist power which attempted to impose British English linguistic superiority on a nation which has a higher number of English speakers.

3. Your film-makers should learn to distinguish the American and Canadian accents. American accents are not limited to redneck drawls or New York accents. Mainland Americans have more than enough accents to cope with in our own country, so all British dramas will now bear subtitles, especially those made in impenetrable dialects such as Scottish, Scouse or Geordie. To make life easier for mainland America, all British films and TV programs must use American vocabulary and accents; Scotch characters will wear plaid, Irish characters will have shamrocks on them, Welsh characters will not be used since we don't have Welsh Americans, and English characters will wear bowler hats and pinstripes.

Bloomberg candidacy may hurt GOP most

A new Newsweek poll on the 2008 contest suggests that Mike Bloomberg might hurt the GOP candidate more than the Democrat.  If 'Mayor Mike' runs the Clinton lead over Giuliani in a two horse race of 7% (51%-44%) becomes a 9% lead (46%-37%-11%).  Clinton and Giuliani both lead their fields in the Newsweek survey.

Mayor Mike shakes up 2008 speculation

Samuel Coates writes:

"Mike" Bloomberg's announcement on Tuesday that he was ending his brief membership of the Republican Party has fuelled speculation that he will run as an independent in 2008.

He has reportedly earmarked $500m for the campaign, a fifth of his estimated wealth, greatly increasing the likelihood of the election campaigns spending over $1bn between them.

London's Daily Telegraph revealed in May that his special adviser Kevin Sheekey (who keeps insisting that Bloomberg isn't running) had three meetings with the New York Chairman of the Independence Party. Bloomberg's website was recently revamped as well, complete with Mike Updates and a red, white and blue colour scheme.

New York's 108th Mayor takes pride in his non-partisan approach, a badge that could appeal to a lot of Americans who are tired of polarised politics. Having previously been an independent and a Democrat he's now seen as a centrist in that he is fiscally conservative but socially liberal. As James Forsyth points out, a big worry for Democrats would be his pull in California and, of course, New York.

Of particular interest to this site would be his position on various foreign policy issues that he has been quite quiet about.

Comparisons are being drawn with when businessman and independent candidate Ross Perot secured Clinton's victory by getting 19% of the vote in 1992. Could Bloomberg save the Republicans in the same way? Or would it be better for him to keep his money for what aides say will really be his next career, a full-time philanthropist?