Cameron Bets on Obama

The British prime minister is a lot more like the American president than you think. And he clearly believes Barack is headed for victory in November.

BY OLIVER KAMM | MARCH 14, 2012

Barack Obama and David Cameron, who have been meeting in Washington this week, are two leaders who owe their present positions, in part, to the backlash of the post-9/11 era. But both the U.S. president and British prime minister have also demonstrated surprising continuities with their interventionist predecessors while in office.

Obama, of course, rose to prominence as a critic of George W. Bush's "dumb war" in Iraq. Cameron, in addition to his pledges to cut spending and get Britain's fiscal house in order, took special effort after rising to leader of the opposition in 2005 to distance himself from the interventionism of Tony Blair.

While Blair's position in British politics had once been unassailable -- he had completely overhauled a Labour Party that was hostile to capitalism and committed to unilateral nuclear disarmament and won three successive general elections in the process -- he paid a heavy political price for the support he gave to U.S. policy after the 9/11 attacks and in particular for committing British forces to the overthrow of Iraq's Saddam Hussein.

Cameron took full advantage. On the fifth anniversary of 9/11, Cameron gave a speech on foreign policy in which he described himself as a liberal conservative rather than a neoconservative. Echoing the Augustinian realism of Reinhold Niebuhr, Cameron decried a simplistic vision of a world order divided between the forces of light and the forces of darkness, and he expounded the virtues of humility and patience.

However, just as Obama's presidency has surprisingly come to be defined by drone war, special operations raids, and a troop surge in Afghanistan, Cameron in government is more interventionist than his statements in opposition suggested he would be. And his relations with Obama are warmer than observers of both men's political records might have predicted.

Cameron's Blair-like tendencies have been much greater than the continuities in foreign policy between Cameron and John Major, the Conservative prime minister from 1990 to 1997. To the despair of Margaret Thatcher, whom he succeeded in Downing Street, Major presided over the greatest catastrophe in British foreign policy since the 1956 Suez crisis: Western inaction in the Balkans. Major completely misinterpreted the war in Bosnia as a recrudescence of intractable ancient hatreds. Possessed not by realism but an amoral conservative quietism, Major's government not only urged no-intervention but actively obstructed the efforts of its NATO and European Union allies to counter Serbian aggression.

In 1999, two years after his first landslide election victory and at the height of the Kosovo crisis, Blair gave a notable speech on foreign policy in Chicago. He cited both Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic and Iraq's Saddam Hussein as threats to international stability. The emphasis of that speech refutes the absurd and insulting charge that after 9/11 Blair acted as "Bush's poodle." In reality, Blair was arguing a case for the responsibility to protect threatened populations while Bush, then governor of Texas and an aspiring presidential nominee, was opposing the Bill Clinton administration's supposed entanglements in the Balkans.

Gregory Shamus/Getty Images

 

Oliver Kamm is an editorial writer for the Times of London.

FORLORNEHOPE

1:07 PM ET

March 14, 2012

The anxieties of allies

"He will be anxious that the U.S. drawdown of forces in Afghanistan should not leave British troops exposed."

Too damn right. Remember "the Gloucesters".

 

REALREALIST

3:19 PM ET

March 14, 2012

hilarious

so now it's "cameron joined obama and sarkozy" in libya?

uh huuh...how about obama waited and waited and waited and then when it was a very good political bet, joined cameron and sarkozy...

amazing the lengths some will go to in order to paint this man as some kind of foreign policy wunderkind...

 

ANON45

8:34 PM ET

March 14, 2012

Nope, Obama followed Sarkozy and Cameron reluctantly...

And that is still the truth.

We will see how Libya turns out, but the blame, good or bad, should mostly be on France or Britain rather than the US.

 

MICHAELRKISTLER

10:32 AM ET

March 15, 2012

Wunderkind

Don't expect him to be a wunderkind, let's just hope he's not as ungeschickt as his predecessor

 

LITTLEMANTATE

6:57 PM ET

March 14, 2012

Niebuhr might not have been a neocon

but he was an apologist for American hegemonists and big business, so he fits pretty well into the all but neocon interventionism of Cameron and Obama, as both try to rhetorically distance themselves from their failed predecessors, but carry on with many of the same policies.

 

LISA JANE

4:21 AM ET

March 15, 2012

Puppets & Muppets

Speaking at a press conference afterwards, Mr Cameron said the mission in Afghanistan was moving into its "final phases".

Both leaders stressed that progress had been made in the country - despite the loss of US, British and Afghan lives.

Progress? Just wondering who is milking opium and heroin dosh....

Lisa
Total Curve

 

SJLOGAN88

10:59 AM ET

March 15, 2012

Well said

Couldn't agree more, well said Lisa.
Sam
Design Jobs

 

DORIARN

3:38 PM ET

March 15, 2012

unfortunately, the only

unfortunately, the only progress is in the killing of innocent civilians

 

STEPHENHILDON

5:44 AM ET

March 15, 2012

Kamm wrong on Labour

"he had completely overhauled a Labour Party that was [..] committed to unilateral nuclear disarmament"

Blair was elected Labour leader in 1994. Labour changed its policy on UND in 1989!

Major's mistake in Bosnia was to recognise its independence when it had no functioning constitution or any vision of how the state would work in the future.

 

CANTRELLLOUISA

9:40 AM ET

March 15, 2012

make money

my classmate's sister-in-law brought home $17033 past week. she is making money on the computer and bought a $416500 house. All she did was get lucky and put to use the guide explained on this site m a k e a sh 4 . [co m]

 

VR

11:11 AM ET

March 15, 2012

Umm... Wait.

"Major completely misinterpreted the war in Bosnia as a recrudescence of intractable ancient hatreds." Can you unpackage this a bit? I thought it was a reemergence of ancient hatreds (per Balkan Ghosts).

 

DORIARN

3:36 PM ET

March 15, 2012

obama and cameron are trying

obama and cameron are trying to show the world they are liberal conservative, while in reality they are far from it. They both should focus instead on projects that can provide more jobs and stability to their own countries
dorian
phen375 reviews

 

RONDEVU

4:50 PM ET

March 15, 2012

without the alliance of

without the alliance of Mr.Bosh and Mr.Blair to overthrow Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Saddam would be still alive killing more of his people and his neighboring countries as he did with Kuwait on 1991. It's laughable that some posts talk about Mr.Obama and Mr.Cameron in the same light.

 

DOUGLAS MCCLAMMY

2:32 AM ET

April 12, 2012

David Cameron

I think that, David Cameron is more of an idiot than I thought.. if he was presenting something to Barak Obama the least he could do was BUY BRITISH! He should take leaf out of Obama's book and think again. Even his wife gave Mrs Obama an ITALIAN silk scarf what does that say about British goods?

 

DOUGLAS MCCLAMMY

2:32 AM ET

April 12, 2012

David Cameron

I think that, David Cameron is more of an idiot than I thought.. if he was presenting something to Barak Obama the least he could do was BUY BRITISH! He should take leaf out of Obama's book and think again. Even his wife gave Mrs Obama an ITALIAN silk scarf what does that say about British goods?