Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiUS Fears That Brown Wants Iraq Pull-Out
A SENIOR Downing Street aide has sounded out Washington on the possibility of an early British military withdrawal from Iraq.
Simon McDonald, the prime minister's chief foreign policy adviser, left the impression that he was "doing the groundwork" for Gordon Brown, according to one of those he consulted.
Brown, who arrives at Camp David in Maryland today to meet President George W Bush, said yesterday that "the relationship with the United States is our single most important bilateral relationship".
Downing Street remains emphatic that he will not unveil a plan to withdraw British troops, who are due to remain in southern Iraq until the Iraqi army is deemed capable of maintaining security. A spokesman said there had been no change in the government's position.
Behind the scenes, however, American officials are picking up what they believe are signals that a change of British policy on Iraq is imminent.
McDonald, a senior diplomat who formerly ran the Iraq desk at the Foreign Office, was in Washington this month to prepare for the summit. He asked a select group of US foreign policy experts what they believed the effect would be of a British pull-out from Iraq.
"The general feeling was that he was doing the groundwork for a Brown conversation," said a source. Most of the experts felt it was a question of when, not if, Britain would leave.
"The view is Britain feels it can't fight two wars, and Afghanistan is more worth fighting for," added the source. Yesterday a British soldier was killed during a rocket attack in Afghanistan, bringing to 67 the number of British fatalities there.
McDonald's questions, coming in the wake of remarks by Douglas Alexander, the international development secretary, about the use of American power, and the appointment of Lord Malloch-Brown, a critic of US policy, as a Foreign Office minister, were seen by some in Washington as another signal that Brown is distancing himself from Iraq.
Malloch-Brown, in particular, arouses strong emotions. Critics within the Bush administration have long viewed the former UN deputy secretary-general with suspicion and were annoyed when he said last month Britain and America would no longer be "joined at the hip".
A former UN official, Artjon Shkurtaj, has now accused him of turning a blind eye to corruption and mismanagement at the United Nations programme he ran for six years.
Shkurtaj lost his job after claiming that rules designed to prevent corruption were being breached in the North Korean offices of the UN Development Programme. Some UN insiders have, however, accused Shkurtaj of being an American "stooge", manipulated by Washington to embarrass Malloch-Brown.
Henry Kissinger, the former US secretary of state, has warned British ministers to beware of distancing themselves from America.
"Ostentatious dissociation from the US just sets up a quarrel," he said in an interview with The Sunday Times.
He added that Brown had qualities that could be "very helpful" to the president in resolving the Iraq problem. "Gordon Brown is an extremely thoughtful person with a more intellectual approach than Tony Blair," said Kissinger. "President Bush has not invited him to Camp David to lecture him on how Britain can fit in with America's wishes. He will listen to him with an open mind."
Brown visited Iraq last month to discuss the situation there with Lieutenant-General Graeme Lamb, the coalition deputy commander and overall UK commander, and Major-General Jonathan Shaw, the commander in the south.
Army chiefs make no secret of their desire to withdraw. British troops are under virtual siege in Basra with four servicemen killed in the past two weeks by mortar or rocket attacks on their two bases. Most are in tents with no overhead protection.
Shaw has drawn up a proposal - backed by Lamb - under which the bulk of the British troops could be withdrawn by the end of the year or early next year, leaving only small training teams. They are due to withdraw to a single base at Basra airport by the end of this month.
Bob Ainsworth, the armed forces minister, told MPs last week that the local Iraqi military commander believed his force was "approaching the point" where it could take over responsibility.
"There is hope among our people out there at every level that we are approaching the situation where that can be done. But we have got to talk to our allies and to the Iraqi government about that. That cannot be a unilateral decision on our part," he said.
In contrast with the famous "Colgate summit" - at which Bush told the press he and Blair shared the same brand of toothpaste - no walkabouts or matey photo-opportunities are expected when the president meets the new prime minister.
"President Bush and prime minister Brown don't need a photo-opportunity of the two of them heading off into the sunset holding hands to prove that the US-UK relationship is as strong as ever," a British official said.
Brown will have a one-to-one dinner with Bush tonight and they will meet again without aides for breakfast tomorrow.
A Whitehall source said: "It will be more businesslike now, with less emphasis on the meeting of personal visions you had with Bush and Blair."
© 2007 The Time Newspaper Company
15 Comments so far
Show AllIn his notebook you will find Gordon Brown has written something along the lines of ...
My mother said
I never should
Play with Neocons
In the wood
If I did
She'd say, "Take care.
Look what happened
To Tony Blair"
poclad.org
end corporate rule,
getting rid of the Bush junta will not solve the problems
You've got to be seriously delusional to think that Brown will be any different than Blair. For one thing, Brown can't afford to be--neither the United States nor his own party hierarchy will allow it.
So even if you assume that Brown isn't another lap dog to Chimpie McFlightsuit, his little trip to Canossa has made him one.
Myself, I find it highly . . . convenient that no sooner does Brown take office than he gets an opportunity to show his mettle in the War on Turrr.
U.S. FEARS Brown Wants Iraq Pull-Out-- ????
The title of this article would be better found on the opinions page under 'patriotic-propaganda.' With 70% of citizens of the U.S.
opposed to this war, the only thing to FEAR is for the safety of people's lives and environmental destruction from the continuation and resulting escalation of OUR armed occupation and war crimes.
The accompanying photograph of their ride in the golf cart, captures the smug look on Bush's face--- similar to that of a little boy who got caught pulling the legs off frogs and setting them off with fire crackers, but who knows he won't be punished.
We, the people of this country, can ONLY HOPE that other nations such as Great Britain, have the balls to stand up to Bush; Because we, the people, have no power over the war profeteer leading the country and the world into WW III, or nuclear war.
As you can see, his administration has whittled down the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and even removed the enforcement of national laws, to suit his administration's agenda.
The latest: a threat which suggests gov't right to take personal property from people who object to Iraq the war. Another 9/11 virtually guarantees laying down Martial Law, and the Presiden'ts control of every resource, whether material or human, in the country.
Now, I don't have any personal property. I'm broke and can't match the bribes of global business such as the oil companies. I'm not slick enough to convince business $ towards professional ethics and away from politic's power-influence. But I do believe, for certain, that what we are doing in the Middle East is wrong. Please, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, Spain, and EVERY OTHER COUNTRY WHO CURRENTLY HAS TROOPS IN AND AROUND IRAQ, withdraw. Withdraw now.
Tony Blair became a liability to his party and they were losing seats in Parliament. The Labor Party cannot lose more seats without losing its majority party status. Therefore, Brown MUST take a new direction instead of following Blair's unpopular direction of always following what the US was doing. His coming out for withdrawal is to be expected.
And if you want to interpret this along the lines of the spoils of war, it looks like the Iraqi legislature will NOT approve the new Hydrocarbon Law that would give foreign oil corporations (including BP) 50 percent control of the oil fields and 50 percent of the profits. If the British were hanging around for the sake of getting the type of oil deals they wanted and didn't get from Saddam, it looks like that isn't going to happen.
Sounds nice doesn't it? We cannot have a unilateral pull out!! Only unilateral INVASIONS are in order here folks!
Foxie - you cannot blame Britain for Iraq, for it was Cheney, Bush and Rummy's idea since BEFORE 9-11 to invade Iraq. Britain just rode along so as not to piss of the snale in the White House - Cheney.
Kaimu - Rothschild was referring to the money of France at the time and was key in capitalising on the French Revolution. Below is a timeline taken from a website regarding this criminal. Here is the link for what it is worth.
http://www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Rothschild.htm
1789: Due to the European ignorance of the Bavarian government's warning, the Illuminati's plan for a French Revolution succeeded from this year to 1793. This revolution was a bankers' dream, it established a new constitution and passed laws that forbade the Roman Church from levying tithes (taxes) and also removed its exemption from taxation.
1790: Mayer Amschel Rothschild states,
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws."
1791: The Rothschilds get, "control of a nation's money," through Alexander Hamilton (their agent in George Washington's cabinet) when they set up a central bank in the USA called the First Bank of the United States. This is established with a 20 year charter.
All in all though, wars are about money and power. Please - anyone - find me one war that was not about power and money. Just one in all fo history and I will eat crow forever!!
I'm sure there is a misprint in the next to last paragraph. It should have said that the two leaders will meet without "ideas" rather than "aides".
Sigh, your four years to late Britain. Even if you pull out now because Iraq is going to hell, ITS YOUR FAULT that its going to hell, and that means even if it stabilizes and somehow democracy stands up without its m-16 crutches keeping it up, there will still be those who wish for violence against you, in laments terms, your fucked. Your only hope now is to pray to whoever you believe in and stay in to finish the job you started. You guys started it, you have to damn well end it.
ALOHA !!
Kissinger failed miserably in Vietnam. Why anyone consults with him is beyond comprehension!
A 200 year old quote from one of the first legendary bankers ... "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws."
- Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
GOVERNMENT IS ONLY AS HONEST AS ITS MONEY ...
The party is over
"Henry Kissinger, the former US secretary of state, has warned British ministers to beware of distancing themselves from America. "Ostentatious dissociation from the US just sets up a quarrel," he said in an interview with The Sunday Times."
Why does anyone ever cite Henry Kissinger's view on foreign policy, unless it is to point out how an uncivilized, anti-democratic country should deal with foreign nations. Kissinger famously said, in relation to Allende in Chile, "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves." If that doesn't destroy one's credentials as a commentator on foreign policy for a "democratic" nation, then I don't know what it takes. Kissinger, quite obviously, believes that "democracy" is whatever he feels is best. Democracy is agreement with Kissinger. Funny, that's Bush's version of democracy, too. And Cheney.
I would hope that Britain would have the gumption to stand up and walk away from the United States on this issue. I doubt Brown will have the balls, but complete isolation is REQUIRED to make the United States see reason. And God save us when we're looking for the ENGLISH to tone down our views of empire!!!
www.unknown-arts.org/politics/?p=126
Sorry, but I have not more confidence in the rational behavior of Brits under Brown than under Blair. The British, like Americans, have sucked up to the war and the muntinous behavior of two rogure nations- the United States and not-so Great Britain- against the world and its own citizens. Face it, Blair was a puppet for non other than the original puppet. What has that got to say about the sorry Brits?
The title of this article is:__ US FEARS BROWN WANTS IRAQ PULL-OUT. The U.S. fears??
Don't put me that catagory, I don't fear it at all. It should read, Bush, Cheney,Rummy,
Rove and Halliburton fear it.
It would seem that the "coalition of the willing" is becoming less willing this days.
Pity.
Thanks, gogohoip, for the resource,
www.poclad.org
Great to see what goes to the core of the problem with active solution.
while-it's-still-possible-to-save-------something-
I appreciate links of usable sources which are provided by readers. And tips on how to approach and deal with well-greased politicans, for the well-meaning but unexpereienced. Much appreciated. To others: Your suggestions are much more productive, especially in the long-term; rather than more dramatic, yet ineffective, ranting at the keyboard every night. thank you for caring.