TrueValueMetrics ... Impact Accounting for the 21st Century

Date: 2026-03-03 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00029357

UK WHAT ABOUT THE 'SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP'? ... Prof James Ker-Lindsay How Close Are Britain and America? PLAY YOUTUBE VIDEO Original article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZzAXmfGQO4
How Close Are Britain and America? Prof James Ker-Lindsay Dec 15, 2025 311K subscribers ... 18,105 views ... 804 likes James Ker-Lindsay \| Questions and Answers This video tackles two questions submitted by viewers, each addressing a different aspect of Britain’s relationship with the United States. The first asks whether the US-UK “special relationship” is actually real, or whether it has always been more slogan than substance. The idea was especially prominent during the Blair–Bush years, when Britain closely aligned itself with Washington on Iraq and the wider War on Terror. But was there ever anything genuinely special about the relationship, or has it mainly served as a convenient phrase used by successive British governments to justify closeness to the United States rather than deeper engagement with Europe? The second question looks at how influence works inside Washington itself. Israel has AIPAC, one of the most powerful lobbying organisations in the US political system, widely seen as shaping American foreign policy in Israel’s favour. So would it make sense for Britain to try something similar? Could a hypothetical “BritPAC” be created to push US policy towards British interests, and would such an approach actually work? By addressing these two questions separately, the video explores the reality of British influence in Washington, the limits of lobbying, and what this tells us about the true nature of the US-UK relationship today. VIDEO CHAPTERS 00:00 Introduction and Titles 00:09 Is the Special Relationship Real? 12:54 Should Britain Set Up a Lobbying Group in the US? SUPPORT THE CHANNEL If you like my videos, please subscribe or become a Channel Member. Thank you! SUBSCRIBE FOR FREE http://www.youtube.com/c/JamesKerLind... BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER / jameskerlindsay MY LATEST BOOK! Secession and State Creation: What Everyone Needs to Know Oxford University Press https://global.oup.com/academic/produ... Amazon https://amzn.to/2MPY3W2 Some of the links above are affiliate links. These pay a small commission if you make a purchase. This helps to support the channel at no additional cost to you. #Britain #UnitedStates #SpecialRelationship Peter Burgess COMMENTARY Peter Burgess Transcript 0:00 Introduction and Titles Hello and welcome. In my latest call for questions, I received a couple of great queries about the relationship between the United States and Britain. 0:09 Is the Special Relationship Real? So, McSwordfish asks, 'Is the USUK special relationship real? Was it ever real? I remember it being spoken about a lot during the Blair Bush years. Was there ever anything special about it? Or was it always just a propaganda phrase used by successive British governments to explain cozying up to the USA rather than the rest of Europe? So, thanks so much for a really, really great question. I think when we think about the United States and Britain this is a really really complex question because obviously British policy makers - and it's almost always British policy makers - will refer to this special relationship. They'll talk about how it means so much and that somehow there's this sort of unique partnership that exists between Britain and the United States. 1:01 But American policy makers don't seem to talk about it in the same way. You don't hear them sort of referring this whole time to the special relationship. So it sort of gives this sort of sense that this is something that really exists in the mind of the United Kingdom rather than the United States. I think there is an element of truth to it. But also I think that it it it is a bit more complex than that. I think that there is something about the relationship between the United States and and and Britain which is very different from many other relationships you'll see between countries in international relations. And I think it's worth actually taking a step back into history and sort of thinking a little bit about how this emerged because of course it won't come as a surprise to anyone that the United States obviously emerged from Britain - from British colonial rule - and the establishment of those colonies on the east coast of the United States and their decision to break away and obviously the very difficult relationship that they had. And remembering of course that there aren't a lot 2:02 of countries that the United States has declared war on in its history. But Britain is actually one of them. The United States declared war in 1812 on Britain. So it has been to war with with the UK officially. But I think what was very interesting is that relatively soon after that relations normalized between the two and actually started to become very strong. Funnily enough, one of the key elements of that was to do with developments in the Americas and the end of the Spanish Empire in the Americas, which actually Britain and the United States took a very similar position on - in fact took the same position on and worked closely with it. Now, one could argue that this was an example of sort of real politik at play - 19th century real politik at play. The United States obviously was already starting to see the Western hemisphere as its area of influence. So, we had the Monroe doctrine that emerged from it. 3:01 And I think Britain at the same time it had spent centuries seeing Spain as its big sort of colonial opposition. So this was a chance to end that Spanish empire in the Americas. So there might have well been that sort of element of sort of working together on it. But it was very telling that they formed a very close relationship. But we've seen that it would ebb and flow over the past 200 years. There have been moments when the relationship has been very very good. But there have also been times when it's very bad. For example, Britain was a little bit more equivocal on the US civil war than the US government wanted. Then of course towards the end of the 19th century you had the United States starting to rise up and become much more influential. It would take on Britain in certain selective places. A really interesting example for anyone who doesn't know, and it's really worth taking a little look at, is the question of Hawaii, which was an independent kingdom and 4:04 actually was looking towards Britain for support against US expansionism. That ultimately failed and the United States expanded and seized control of Hawaii. And that explains why, for anyone who's interested, Hawaii's flag actually has the Union flag - the British Union flag - in it. So it was actually quite interesting that you would see elements of imperial competition between Britain and the United States in the late 19th century. Then, of course, in the 20th century you had the First and the Second World War. Many in Britain felt disappointed the United States didn't enter as soon as it could and should have. Then, of course, Suez in 1956, which in many ways marked the final end of imperial Britain and the the the clear dominance, at least within the West, of the United States. That was a campaign where Britain and France had teamed up with Israel to invade Egypt to seize hold of the Suez Canal. 5:04 The US president, Eisenhower, was fiercely opposed to this and saw this as an extremely dangerous move. This could upset the Cold War. It could give the Soviet Union leverage in the Middle East. He pushed back very heavily against Britain and France. This was a moment of utter humiliation for Britain, and, in many ways, really marked the break - at least in British minds - between Britain as a great imperial power and Britain as a post-imperial middle state with remnants of that great imperial power, such as the permanent seats at the United Nations. So it hasn't always been entirely smooth relationship. I think we need to recognize that. But on the other hand, there are quite clearly elements that bring the two countries close together. There is a shared history. Many in the United States trace their ancestry back to Britain. 6:01 There's obviously the language element, which shouldn't be underestimated. This is incredibly important. It does mean that there is sort of common language, although that has also been overplayed at times. But it does mean that there is easy communication that exists, which, as I say, I think is important in all of this. I think in many ways much of the thinking has been very similar. The legal systems are similar. All of this means that there's a lot of commonality there that makes it very easy in many ways for British to understand America and America to understand Britain. Not entirely. We can see where differences exist. But I think that there is a commonality which has been quite important in that relationship, even if at times that relationship has been strained. But certainly so you know where we stand today I think what's been really interesting is that in the past several decades this special relationship has become steadily less important. 7:02 Now, some would say well that's because of the legacy of the Second World War disappearing. George HW Bush, George Bush senior, had fought in the Second World War and was sort of seen as maybe that last of that generation who had that sort of close tie to Europe and to the United Kingdom. Since then, it has obviously been very different. So many would talk about Barack Obama that he had a very different history behind him with his Kenyan ancestry. Britain had a very difficult process of decolonization from Kenya, which left a lasting impact. Maybe that had also affected his views. In the case of Biden, and certain other US presidents; John Kennedy, for example, there was an Irish ancestry. We know that there was sort of an element of antagonism between Britain and Ireland that would come into the thinking sometimes. But I think essentially what we've seen is essentially a close relationship persists. 8:02 Trump has been especially interesting. I think in all sorts of reasons because Trump quite clearly sees his British ancestry as an important part of his identity. The fact that he set up these golf courses in Scotland, where his mother came. He is quite clearly an ardent royalist, for better or for worse. It was felt that Queen Elizabeth and King Charles could somehow get through to him in ways that others couldn't. I think this has been terribly interesting in all of this. So, I think Trump in many ways is much more pro-British. But, on the other hand, you also see the fact that he's got very little sentimentality when it comes to hard-nosed business. The United Kingdom did not get let off from his tariffs. They might not have been as tough as on some other countries. But he wasn't going to give a pass and say, 'Well, look, land of my mother and the rest of it. 9:01 I love Scotland and setting up golf courses. And I love going there. I'm not going to impose tariffs.' No, there was none of that. So, I think it has been really interesting. But, of course, we also see the way that the two countries cooperate on things like defense, intelligence, security. Again, this has been called into question because of Trump, because even though at a performative level he might sort of like to have those ties with Britain, it doesn't follow through that he's carrying it through in real terms of policy. We've seen this in several ways. For example, there's been talk of the United States FBI had an important office at its embassy in London which was dealing with certain sensitive matters. The United Kingdom asked that this wasn't shut down amongst all the cuts that were taking place. But it was shut down. So, in that sense, I think a feeling in certain parts in the United Kingdom that the United States just isn't as reliable. And obviously, we're seeing many in Europe feel this way. 10:00 But I think that there is this sort of sense of what does this special relationship mean in real terms. So all this is to say it's extremely complex. There's no doubt about it. We know that relations in international relations are complex. Different countries have a whole weight of history behind them. I think it's no difference between the United Kingdom and the United States. But can we really speak of a special relationship? Probably to an extent, but not nearly as much as I think British policy makers would like to think it exists - or would like to present the view that it exists. I think this has always been something in Britain. It's sort of this way of Britain saying we are important in world affairs because we are a medium mediating influence with the United States. I think just to end on this one thing that has I think been tremendously damaging is Brexit. Now, regular viewers will know what I think about Brexit and and what a disaster it was. But I think that this was a really clear area where it has 11:02 been extremely difficult and and damaging for the United Kingdom. And it wasn't as though Britain wasn't told this. Obama did say that Brexit would have an effect on the United States as well as for for Britain and Europe. People at the time sort of said he mustn't get involved in British politics, especially those who were supporting Brexit; although funnily enough those people were quite happy to have Trump doing all sorts of things in British politics. But they were opposed when Barack Obama said this. But he made a very good point. I always felt that you know where Britain's real value lay to the United States was being a US sympathetic if not voice in European decision-making That when Europe got together to discuss whatever it might have been trade or security, the United States could rely on Britain not to slavishly follow its policies, but at least make sure that its views were represented in the room. 12:02 Of course, when Britain left the European Union, suddenly that was removed and the United States had to go to other partners. And so I think Britain made itself far less significant to the United States through that move of Brexit. One of many of the harmful effects it's had on Britain's standing and its economy - and one that you know still won't be acknowledged by the vast majority of of people who were trying to persuade the British people to leave the European Union; successfully trying to persuade Britain the British people to leave. But as I say that has also had an effect on all of this. So, wrapping it up. The special relationship is probably more in the minds of policy makers in Britain than in the United States. Certainly more in the minds of policy makers in Britain than the United States. So, not nearly as important as people feel, but it can't be completely discounted. 12:55 Should Britain Set Up a Lobbying Group in the US? Tied to the last question, Pontimin4173 asks, 'Israel has IPAC to bend US foreign policy towards Israeli interests would it make 13:04 sense for Britain to set up a brick pack to bend US policy towards British interests? Would such a thing work? This is really really interesting and sort of tying in with the previous question about this sort of the nature of the special relationship. I don't think that this would work. I think for all sorts of reasons. I think in the case of Israel's relationship with the United States, like Britain it hasn't been quite as smooth as people often imagine. I spoke already about the Suez crisis that also played out, by the way, with Israel. The United States pushed back against Israel. And even though the United States supported the creation of Israel, the relationship really didn't start to emerge as we know it today until the 1960s. So, it it hasn't been quite as smooth as people often imagine that from day one. The United States wasn't this vociferous supporter of Israel 14:03 in quite the same way that people might imagine. But I think that it sort of rather depends on the fact that Israel is very much a cause that the United States sees. There are obviously links because there is a large Jewish community in the United States, which obviously supports Israel and has channeled support towards it. It has been a very cohesive lobby in the United States for that cause, which I think has been very interesting. But nevertheless it's very much a sense that Israel is surrounded by enemies. It's a liberal democracy that it's economically successful. This is something that the United States should support. I think a lot of support. Traditionally, many of the Jewish community positions towards a politician would rely on that politician's position on Israel. 15:03 It actually became very costly in US politics to speak out against Israel. I think what's very interesting is there are signs that that is now changing, but traditionally it wasn't the way. I don't think that that ever really existed in in the same way in in in the United States with Britain. I don't think you know for a start there wasn't that existential element. There wasn't that sense of 'if we don't support Britain, Britain is just going to disappear. It's going to be attacked by all its neighbors and that's going to be the end of it. Our heritage is British. We speak English. We need to defend this this country from which the United States ultimately emerged.' That just doesn't exist. I think the other element that's really interesting in all of this is that there is a very large Irish-American community. I think one of the things that really has been tremendously positive in in my lifetime is seeing the relationship and the situation in Northern Ireland change. 16:01 But I can well remember when I was growing up in the 1980s that there was a very very high degree of support amongst Irish Americans for the IRA. The IRA, through its political wing Sinn Fein, would often raise money in the United States. There were a lot of Irish American politicians who would speak out very strongly. So I think that was also baked into the US polity. While the country tended to be more pro- British - not entirely, as I'd sort of mentioned in the previous question - I don't think that there was quite that same sort of unanimous support for it that there was for support for Israel across the US body politic. I think for all these reasons, the idea of a BritPAC that could lobby for Britain might be interesting, I just don't see that it would get the traction. I don't think there's enough people in America who identify strongly with Britain. 17:05 A large amount of Americans clearly have British roots. That's no doubt about it. And for anyone who's ever done something like 23 or Me, if you're British, you will be forever getting pings that it's just uncovered a new relative somewhere in the United States. So, you can you can see that that is there are quite clearly very strong links that still exist between the two countries in that regard. But I don't think it's it's an animating force for those people. I don't think that somebody who is British American - not that one ever uses that term in the way that you use Irish American or Jewish American or Black American. These are these are clearly identifiable groups that you don't have in the same way with British. I just don't think that you're going to get that sort of motivating factor that you're going to say to these people, 18:00 'look, you have to really go out there and fight for British interests in the United States.' That just doesn't seem to to sort of get the traction. So I think you know while certainly Britain does a lot of lobbying in the United States and the embassy will be very busy sort of making sure that it's in touch with members of Congress and will try to have as best relations as they possibly can with the administration, I just don't think that sort of creating some sort of body that would further those interests would would get terribly far. But of course, if anyone feels differently, do let me know in in the comments below. I'd be interested to hear any any thoughts on that, especially from American viewers. I hope you found that interesting. If so, please don't forget to give it a like and perhaps subscribe to the channel if you haven't already. As always, thanks so much for watching and see you in the next video.

SITE COUNT