Since President trump took office, the Special Relationship between the US and the UK has suffered a string of severe shocks. It's been an open secret that Trump intentionally ignored the Special Relationship, the prospect of which has once again become a hot topic in the academic and strategic circles at home and abroad. This article will discuss how the Trump Administration's UK policy takes its toll on and what does the future hold for the Special Relationship.
DOES TRUMP DELIBERATELY IGNORE THE US-UK SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP?
Early in his presidency, Trump ordered to be replaced in the Oval Office a bust of Churchill, the late British Prime Minister who coined the term Special Relationship, to give the impression that he valued the Special Relationship. When British Prime Minister Theresa May visited the White House for the first time, Trump made a public statement to “continue to support” the Special Relationship in a joint press conference with May. As it turned out, however, all this was a sham for a lack of sustainability. Trump's UK policy in the past two years since he took office showed that he deliberately ignored the Special Relationship to a greater extent than any other US President since the end of the Second World War.
First, in terms of etiquette, Trump does not go by rulebook and does not give the British side “face”. In January 2017, May flew to Washington as soon as Trump entered the White House, becoming the first foreign leader to visit the US since Trump took office. According to the tradition of US-UK relations over the 70 years since the WWⅡ, Trump should've paid a return visit to the UK at an early date. In addition, the newly elected President of the US usually makes his first visit to the UK. However, Trump chose Saudi Arabia instead, and Israel and Vatican after that, and still bypass the UK when attending NATO summit in Belgium, a neighbor country of the UK. To avoid the troubled Britain was apparently not because “he can't afford the time”, but to put Britain at the back of his diplomatic agenda. Such a rarity in the postwar history of US-UK Special Relationship causes people to speculate whether Trump intentionally ignore the Special Relationship. Second, at the policy level, Trump clearly does not treat the bilateral relations as it is a special one. One, Trump didn't offer a helping hand to Britain when it was caught in the Brexit dilemma. May's rush to visit the US and meet Trump just a week after he entered the White House was driven by the fact that she was trapped in the Brexit negotiations and was eager to secure the first bilateral trade deal for the UK when Britain leave the EU. However, Trump did not actively respond to the British side's desire, and did not reach any trade agreements or intentions with the UK that would suit its post-Brexit needs and benefit the UK. Two, Trump seldom played up the Special Relationship since he took office more than two years ago, which proves that he deliberately ignored the Special Relationship. Trump's visit to the UK in July 2018 was downgraded to a work visit because of the anti-US and anti-Trump atmosphere in the UK at that time. In June 2019, Trump finally made an official visit to Britain, during which he made no mention of the Special Relationship, not only making no contribution to “revive” the Special Relationship as hoped by the UK side, but instead showing to the world that to him, the so-called Special Relationship was nothing but unrequited supplication of the UK. Three, Trump went even further to throw indiscreet remarks over British affairs. He expressed rude comments on the mass terrorist attack in London in June 2017 instead of offering sympathy and understanding. He accused the British intelligence agen-cies for their espionage against him. He even cited military and intelligence security as grounds to coerce the British side away from 5G technology and projects offered by Chinese Huawei. Four, the US and the UK also have serious differences on some major issues in international affairs such as the operation of NATO and whether to maintain the so-called “rules-based post-war international order”.
为进一步维护人民的生命安全与饮食健康，2009年2月28日，第十一届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第七次会议通过并发布了《中华人民共和国食品安全法》，同年6月1日起施行。直至2013年，实施4年的《中华人民共和国食品安全法》启动修订。随后，最新版的《中华人民共和国食品安全法》由中华人民共和国第十二届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十四次会议于2015年4月24日修订通过，共十章，共计154条，并于同年10月1日起施行。
Since July 2019, the British Ambassador to the United States has been forced to resign after revelations of the contents in a cipher telegram that the Ambassador sent back to the British Government about the "incompetent", "unreliable" and "internal management chaos" of the Trump Administration which led to an angry response from Trump. That gave another heavy blow to the already perilous "special relationship" between the United States and the United Kingdom. The picture shows Trump attending an event in Washington, D.C. on July 8, 2019. Trump said on social media that he would no longer deal with the British Ambassador to the United States, who was forced to resign.
Trump's series of disregard for the Special Relationship aroused strong anti-Trump and anti-America sensation in Britain. Nearly 2 million London citizens signed a petition ahead against Trump's first visit to the UK. Before his second visit, polls showed that 70 percent of the British public didn't approve of Trump, and the British parliament said it wouldn't accept Trump's delivery of speech there. In July 2019, the confidential cable by British ambassador to the US to the British government on how the Trump Administration is “incompetent” “unreliable” and “messily managed” was leaked, causing angry response from Trump, and the forced resignation of the ambassador. This was another heavy blow to the already precarious Special Relationship. The cable from the British ambassador reflected the anger of the British government and public at the Trump Administration's inaction and even schadenfreude towards the UK's Brexit dilemma, as well as the frustration of the British side of its helplessness at the Special Relationship.
WHY DOES TRUMP DELIBERATELY IGNORE THE US-UK SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP?
The Special Relationship, forged after WWII and lasted for over 70 years, was based on two specific historical conditions. One, it was the strategic need of the US and UK as Cold War allies against Soviet Union. Two, as the third largest power after the WWII, Britain still had the strength and qualification to maintain the Special Relationship with the US, which can help the US in the implementation of its global strategy. The analysis of the evolution of these two specific historical conditions can be used as a starting point to explore why Trump deliberately ignores the Special Relationship.
The answer to the question of whether the Special Relationship will “end” in Trump's presidency depends on how to define “end”. If “end” is defined by the discontinuation of strategic cooperation between the US and Britain in international arena, the answer then is no, because such cooperation will continue in some areas of international affairs in the future, such as their tacit understanding on and cooperation in suppressing Iran's oil exports. If “end” means the two sides no longer work closely and support each other as they did in all kinds of actions against the Soviet Union during the cold war, then indeed, the Special Relationship is coming to its end, and reduced to “normal state-to-state relations”. Under such circumstances, although the US and the UK do not exclude strategic cooperation on certain issues and at certain occasions, such cooperation is only the “general state-to-state” one, away from the so-called Special Relationship. It is worth noting that although both Britain and the US believe that “common language, values, democratic system”, economic and political ties and personnel exchanges are the basis of their bilateral relations, the two countries have different rhetoric and emphases on the Special Relationship and its cultural and social foundation. The British side set great store by the Special Relationship, while the US side only mention the “history of the Special Relationship”, without referring to the specific term Special Relationship. It is not difficult to see that the British side's particular emphasis on the cultural, social and value foundation of the relationship between Britain and the US is a lament for the shaky Special Relationship when it can do nothing to save it, whereas the US side makes similar statements only with a perfunctory tone. In judging whether the US-UK Special Relationship will “end” in Trump presidency, three factors need to be highlighted.
Trump's “America first” and “economic first” strategies have greatly weakened America's strategic reliance on Britain, making it no longer an urgent strategic need to maintain the Special Relationship.
The end of the cold war was once regarded by the US, Britain and other western countries as a victory of the western “democratic system” over the socialist system and ideology and as the “end of history”. They celebrated that and sought to transplant western democratic system to non-western countries. While pursuing unipolar hegemony,the US was eager to promote westernization, democratization and Americastyle globalization in the world. The National Security Strategy reports from George Bush to Clinton administration were all about “expanding democracy” and “shaping” non-western countries. Although the strategic need of building the Special Relationship between the US and the UK was reduced to a certain extent due to the fact that the US lost its all-around “systemic rival” because of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US still saw some value in the Special Relationship, as it helped in the process of building a general alliance among western countries led by itself after the cold war, as well as implementing its “expanding” and “shaping” strategy. More than that, a succession of the Gulf war, Kosovo war, Afghanistan war, Iraq war and the post-9·11 global war on terrorism after the cold war provided a certain opportunity for the continuation of the Special Relationship. All the American Presidents after the cold war more or less emphasized that the Special Relationship was still of great strategic value to the US, and that was also the case with the British side.
At present, the international strategic situation has undergone new changes not seen in a century. The biggest change is the relative decline of the US as the super power and the rise of China as the world's second largest economy. China-US relations have entered the so-called “new normal”. Another major change is the “collective rise” of non-western countries mainly in Asia-Pacific region. The economic aggregate of nonwestern countries has surpassed that of western countries represented by the US, Europe and Japan, and the economic and trade aggregate of the Asia-Pacific has also surpassed that of Europe, and replaced the Europe-Atlantic region as the geopolitical center of the world. It is in this new dynamic that Trump has been thrusted onto the stage of history.
调度人员得到告警后，对异常状态进行处理。在一体化控制过程中，要确保操作平台具有必须的实现功能，确保电力调度监控工作的进行遵循合理的步骤规范，提高运行人员在电气设备操作过程汇总的合理性和安全性。另还可实现任意遥控操作间的互相闭锁，并且可对用户开放，闭锁条件可由用户自行设定。
In a word, in the 20 years since the end of the cold war, British power and the mutual strategic needs between the US and the UK have been declining. However, the Special Relationship between the US and the UK has continued to this day, only to experience a freefall drop after Trump took office. Compared with his predecessors, Trump neglects the Special Relationship to a greater degree, not only because of the two factors of less mutual strategic need and less usefulness of Britain to US strategy due to its power decrease, but also triggered by Trump's leadership style and his “America first” “economy first” policy.
在之后与它的谈话中，我得到了一些信息。人类为了发展科技，大肆破坏自然环境，在三千年后科技终于位居宇宙排名的前五名。三千年后的人都很富裕，像医院、酒吧、游乐场都只有机器人员工。这时候的人类不用工作，也能得到每天一万元的宇宙币（一种宇宙的通用货币），但唯一的问题是：地球环境受到了无法修复的破坏，自然界已经没有了氧气，所以人类要戴着氧气面罩才能到户外进行活动。因为环境受到污染，地球人只能向外星球移民，给外星球增添了负担。外星球一再提出要地球人改善地球的环境，但地球人依旧我行我素。最终，外星人忍无可忍，决定联手消灭地球人。此时此刻，在地球上的某一处，外星人大军正在与地球士兵作战呢。
比特币、众多山寨币和一些无币区块链项目大都会坚持使用P2P网络，这其实是去中心化的物理基础。我们知道纯粹的P2P网络是没有服务器角色的，每个节点既是服务器又是客户端，彼此地位均等。这种地位均等与设备的计算能力、网络带宽等无关。
The reason why the then British Prime Minister Theresa May was in a hurry to visit the United States and meet Trump in just a week after Trump took office in the White House was that, caught up in the "Brexit" negotiations, she was eager to reach the first post-Brexit bilateral trade agreement between Britain and the U.S. so as to improve Britain's status in its negotiation with the EU, appease the British people and set an example for Britain to sign bilateral trade agreements with other countries after the Brexit. In the picture, the outgoing British Prime Minister Teresa May was leaving her office for parliament for the last prime minister's Q&A session in London on July 24, 2019.
Different from his predecessors after the second world war that treat “leading the world” as top priority, Trump recognized that the relative decline of American power made it difficult to shield its Western allies, thus put forward the “America first” “economy first” policy designed to protect American hegemony, and cut substantially its “responsibility” to and intervention policy in western countries and across the globe.
Trump's “America first” and “economic first” strategies have greatly weakened America's strategic reliance on Britain, making it no longer an urgent strategic need to maintain the Special Relationship. In other words, Trump's deliberate disregard for the Special Relationship is caused by the interest and strategic repositioning of the US. Such a policy adjustment is the national behavior of the US government towards the UK, and Trump's personal preference is not a key factor. In addition, Trump's indifference to the Special Relationship is related to the decline of British power, which brings back to the conclusion that the Special Relationship is less helpful to the US due to the decline of British power. From the perspective of strength, the US was the world's biggest power after WWII. The UK's military power, especially its long-range projection capability and global influence, still exceeded other western countries except the US despite the post-WWII decline of its national strength, making it the main military aid of the US in the cold war against the Soviet Union. Therefore, in the face of the complex post-WWII international situation, especially the cold war against the Soviet Union, not only was the US willing to maintain the Special Relationship with Britain, but Britain also had the corresponding strength to maintain it with the US. However, after the end of the cold war, Britain's comprehensive power and its “usefulness” to the US in implementing its global strategy presented a freefall decline. Although Britain sought to maintain or even “revive” the Special Relationship after the cold war, and to keep pace with the US in some major international issues such as sending troops in the Gulf war, Kosovo war, Iraq war and Afghanistan war, the performance of the British army on the battlefields, due to the limit of its strength and capability, were often surprisingly below expectation, nowhere near its performance during the second world war. In addition, by 2017 when Trump took office, the GDP ranking of the UK had dropped from the third place in the world and the second place among western countries when Churchill proposed the Special Relationship between the UK and the US to the ninth place in the world and the seventh place among western countries. In terms of military spending, the UK dropped to seventh place in the world in 2017 from the third place at the early post-WWII days, behind countries such as Saudi Arabia and India.
WILL THE SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP “END” IN TRUMP'S PRESIDENCY?
The post-WWII international strategic situation had two major features: one was that the US, with the firm support of the UK, fought with the Soviet union for the dominance of the postwar world, geopolitical advantages and ideological superiority, and thus triggered the cold war between the US and the Soviet Union； two was that most non-western countries in colonial and semi-colonial status in Asia, Africa and Latin America were gradually awakened during the second world war, and demanded post-war independence, autonomy and breakaway from the European and American colonial rule or hegemony. Their fight took aim directly at the US and the UK, sending shocks across western countries against their colonial rule and hegemony. These two features determine the specific interlink of interests and mutual strategic needs between the US and the UK in the postwar world. For Britain, the biggest strategic challenge after the WWII was to maintain its “imperial legacy”, colonial rule and status as a global power in the face of the general awakening and independence demands of the vast number of colonies under its direct rule. For the US, its biggest strategic challenge was to stem the global tide that would go against it, contain Soviet Union, and realize the dream of “leading” the postwar world. Therefore, the US and Britain urgently need to embrace each other for all-around strategic cooperation.
In the 20 years since the end of the cold war, British power and the mutual strategic needs between the US and the UK have been declining. However, the Special Relationship between the US and the UK has continued to this day, only to experience a freefall drop after Trump took office.
First, the US and Britain do share common “cultural identity”, “history and values”, and the “shared inheritance” of Anglo-Saxon blood lineage, languages and laws, the exact important basis for Churchill to put forward the concept of Special Relationship. More than that, from the strategic cooperation during world war I and world war II to the long-term cooperation over the 70 years after WWII, the US and Britain have accumulated over 100 years of cooperative assets, experience and “inertia”, as well as extensive economic and social ties. So far, the US is still the UK's largest export market and one of its biggest sources of imports. In addition, the two countries have cooperation foundation in multilateral mechanisms and international institutions, and such cooperation will go on in the future. Therefore, even if the Special Relationship comes to an end, the two countries will still maintain “normal” friendly and cooperative relations, or even strategic cooperation within a certain scope. In the short term, it is difficult to distinguish the bilateral cooperation to be the “general state-tostate one” or a special one within the framework of the Special Relationship. This will indeed increase the complexity and difficulty to judge whether the Special Relationship will “end”.
Second, the Special Relationship is a continuation and development of wartime alliance between the US and the UK during WWII centered on relations on strategy and security matters and cooperative relations on military security, thus making cooperation between the two countries in peacetime take on the characteristics of wartime military alliance. British scholar Barry Buzan criticized such as a “supernormal security” phenomenon. During the cold war, the so-called “supernormal security” permeated every aspect of international politics, as the international community took the side either with the US or with Soviet Union at that time, with almost all of the international political and economic life being incorporated into the framework of the US-Soviet Union cold war, and with the cold war thinking of confrontation applied to problem solving. This constitutes another background against which the US and the UK maintained Special Relationship and long-term wartime alliance in peacetime. But under Trump's “America first” “economy first” strategy, he cut down America's participation in and intervention of international affairs, suggesting the thinking of de-supernormal security. As Trump is not passionate about maintaining the Special Relationship in peacetime, he therefore acts in deliberate disregard for the Special Relationship. For Trump, the US only get to maintain Special Relationship with one country, and that country is none other than the United States!
Third, is there sustainability in Trump's deliberate disregard for the Special Relationship? This depends not only on whether trump can be re-elected, but also on whether Trump's “America first”, “economic first” and de-“supernormal security” strategy is his individual whim or represents the long-term interests of the US and thus enjoys broad popular foundation. The discussion on this issue will cause more controversy. If Trump wins a second term, it may not bode well for Britain's efforts to “revive” its Special Relationship with the US.
老人的遗嘱写着：“我知道我的学生可能贪图我的收藏，但是在我苍凉的晚年，真正陪我的是他。就算我的孩子们爱我，说在嘴里、挂在心上，却不伸出手来，那真爱也成了假爱。相反，就算我这个学生对我的情都是假的，假的帮我十几年，连句怨言都没有，也就算是真的！”
CONCLUSION
In 2005, the then British liberal democrat foreign affairs spokesman William Wallace, in the presence of troubles in the US-UK relationship, wrote, there are Israel, Australia, Mexico, Italy, Poland, and even Saudi Arabia that have Special Relationship with the US , with the UK being just one of them. he believed that the US and Britain's Special Relationship is “dead”. Since entering the White House, Trump paid less attention to the so-called Special Relationship than any other US President since the end of the cold war. If Wallace were to write another article on the Special Relationship, he would be surer than he did in 2005 of its “death”. Although this article does not fully agree with the “death” statement about the Special Relationship, it goes along with the view that it is transitioning to the “general state-to-state relationship”, and that the Special Relationship is approaching the “end”. It is clear that the future of the Special Relationship is no longer a matter of “ending” or not, but of how to prolong its last gasp.
DOI:10.19422/j.cnki.cn10-1398/d.2019.04.007
标签：地球论文; 中华人民共和国论文; 均等论文; 安全法论文; 宇宙论文; 《ContemporaryWorld》2019年第4期论文; University of International Relations论文;