eldanielfire wrote: ↑Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:51 am
piquant wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 7:14 pm
If the UK isn't on the inside of the EU, feeding information back and forth between the EU and the USA (as things stand the two standard bearers for standards on a global basis), and helping to shape the discussion within the EU and the direction of the EU that reduces the value of the UK to the EU. That's not to say the UK always did what the USA wanted, but the back and forth is a constant, hardly just on big issues, and not always on matters even that might give rise to a claim of a special relationship (along with Canada, and SK and Israel, and...)
To ignore that is to ignore how governing actually works across vast swathes of policy in a global world
Really? That all seems vague speculation. What was the UK feeding back that the USA couldn't get or needed? Last I heard Obama was closest with Angela Merkel out of all the EU countries when the UK was in. And anything he couldn't get the NSA spy's told him anyway.
As for helping be standard bearers? In what? Since the UK came about in 1994 it's pretty strong case that the likes of China, Iran, Russia have not responded or followed in any positive way to Western pushes for "standards" and I'm not sure the USA have standards as such for say trade that isn't "corporate profit first" as their standards are far lower. if anything the biggest thing in this area was the EU with the UK inside doing the TIIP deal which was basically designed to screw out European countries so corporations get their own way. The EU hasn't had any impact or significant influence on USA foreign policy with or without the UK. About the most we get is photo opportunities. Well if your a G7 country. Which has little to do with being in the EU.
Meanwhile Biden just announced a huge trilateral military and technology-sharing agreement with the Uk and Australia to counter the threat of China. Hardly diminished returns there.
Starts with a critique a general observation is too vague, segues to the last rumour you heard on the playground about Obama and Merkel. Fine work. Now maybe Obama and Merkel were the closest, but perhaps that's how it works on a personal level rather than a national one, and perhaps that was after Brexit was a possible thing and then a thing.
Fwiw, and then I'll intend to make more use of the ignore function, you don't tend to get big stand out moments in diplomacy and cooperation, it's more a constant grind and a sharing of values/ideas. It doesn't event mean you get the deal you want all the time, but that political and cultural exchange has value in and of itself between administrations, between the FO and the DoS..., whether that's on climate, military, banking, agriculture, legal structure, foreign policy...
If you wanted to make the case trying to keep a foot inside the EU whilst maintaining closer links to the US than much if not all else in the EU wasn't giving the returns you wanted then fine, I think it'd be starting with a flawed premise but whatever. I can't for the life of me see what's problematic or even up for discussion in the notion that the UK inside the EU was politically worth more to the USA than the UK being outside the EU, really the only way to way to counter that is to consider the UK will fold on banking, agriculture, health service provision... and in effect transfers a decent chunk of its wealth to the USA