British citizens seek freedom from U.S. influence
Amanda Huskey
Staff Writer
Thus far, my stay in Britain has been met with the utmost respect of my nationality. However, it has not taken the two months that I have been in Leeds to sense the growing impatience with U.S. foreign policy among academics and students alike. Nevertheless, this frustration may be misdirected.
I have ascertained that the general mistrust of the Bush administration is nothing new to the British. Students tell of excessive press scorn after Bush's election that rose to a climax with the U.S. withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol on global warming.
Their perception of a ferocious childlike retaliation to Sept. 11, in the guise of the U.S. war on terror has the British concerned. Such apprehension has been instilled by the self-hyped yet passive involvement that Britain has had in events following Sept. 11.
A recent poll conducted by a major British newspaper revealed that 51 percent of Britons are opposed to British backing of the U.S. assault on Iraq. British politicians are clearly not in tune with their electorate. The leaders of both major political parties are intent on "standing shoulder to shoulder with America." Many Britons seem to be frustrated with Britain's submissive and acquiescent approach to foreign policy relations with the U.S.
John Fowler, a political science student at Leeds, sums up the public's perceptions, saying, "We're that annoying little dog that won't stop yapping. We'll pick a fight with whoever we want as long as it's within the limits of our leash. Guess who's at the other end of our tether."
The harsh reality that Britain is no longer the world power it once was is slowly filtering into the consciousness of the public.
Prime Minister Tony Blair's resolve to deepen British involvement in the U.S.' global war against al Qaeda is fooling no one. The tide of anti-American discussion is heading out.
For one in five Britons, the U.S. remains the most desirable country in which to live. The distinction between positive American culture, ideological influences and the global farce being proposed by the Bush administration is becoming better defined.
Politically, Washington risks a trade war with Europe with the introduction of steel tariffs, further widening the political divide. The focus here is the alleviation of global poverty, not the systematic extermination of all those who oppose and have potential to resist U.S. foreign policy.
Blair appears to have succumbed to U.S. influence. As a senior politics lecturer at the University of Leeds describes it, "Blair is globe-trotting on a plume of hot air. He is running the risk of alienating his fellow politicians by acting like a one man presidency, alienating Europe with his apparent unconditional support of U.S. action and alienating the British public by ignoring the pure direct selfishness of action that this country really needs."
I do not sense an intense anti-U.S. sentiment in Britain, but a slight degree of intimidation and apprehension of the powerful ideological forces in the U.S. combined with disgust for the manner in which Blair is representing Britain in such international affairs.