British politics

Bagehot's notebook

David Cameron in the Gulf

Britain and America disagreeing over the Middle East

Feb 25th 2011, 18:00 by Bagehot

BACK in London, one final thought from the prime minister’s tour of Egypt, Kuwait, Qatar and Oman. As discussed here and in my print column this week, there is no concealing David Cameron’s view that big changes are underway in the Arab world, and that—despite the real risks that come with change—that there are reasons for optimism, from the fact that the Egyptian army refused to use force against that country’s people to the encouragingly moderate, non-religious demands of the opposition protest leaders he met in Cairo.

What does all this prime ministerial enthusiasm and optimism mean for Israel, given Britain’s already slightly strained relations with that country? There, I think the picture is a bit mixed.

Famously, during a visit to Turkey in July 2010, the newly-elected British prime minister stunned some in Israel by saying comparing Gaza to a prison camp.
This week in Egypt and the Gulf, Mr Cameron said and did some things liable to reassure Israel.

On February 23rd, during his question and answer session with students at Qatar University, Mr Cameron offered a robust defence of Israel’s right to a peaceful existence. He responded to a string of sharply-worded questions about Israel by suggesting that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was used as a distraction by Arab autocrats, saying:

In too many countries in the Middle East, some rulers say to their people ‘be angry about [the Israeli-Palestinian conflict], don’t be angry about the fact that you live in a non-open society’

On Iran, Mr Cameron repeatedly signalled his grave concern about the Iranian nuclear programme. British officials briefed that their government had crossed a threshold of impatience when it came to waiting for the 27 members of the European Union to agree tougher sanctions on Iran. From now, on, they said, Britain was willing to work with a smaller group of countries that were willing to act to curb Iran’s access to international financial institutions, shipping lines and the like.

But at the same time Mr Cameron gave voice to an evolving British view that Iran is a country in need of taking down a peg or two, rather than building up into some sort of terrifying regional powerhouse. Iran’s Islamic rulers, he said in Qatar:

are already suffering from international sanctions. Their economy is weak and vulnerable and the regime only survives by cracking down on its political opposition. On its current path Iran is set to become an international pariah state with no friends, no money, nowhere to go

Asked in Cairo about the Iranian request to send two warships through the Suez Canal, Mr Cameron said he did not think that the international community should pay too much attention or “big up” Iran’s attempts to stir up trouble:

I think we should spend a bit more time actually pointing out the many and varied weaknesses in their political system

But as I said at the start, this was not the whole picture. Just a couple of days before Mr Cameron set off for Egypt, Britain had voted for a draft United Nations Security Council resolution, joining France, Germany and 11 other members of the Security Council in backing the resolution, which was vetoed by America.

What was striking about Mr Cameron’s trip to the Arab world was that he was willing to draw attention in public to the fact that Britain disagreed with America on this subject.

Under questioning on this subject at Qatar University, Mr Cameron told the students that although America and Britain were close allies, on this subject he disagreed with America. Israeli settlement-building was a barrier to peace, he said, and a viable peace process needed the "full commitment of the US".

How does this mesh with Mr Cameron’s cautious optimism about the winds of change blowing through Tunisia, Egypt, Libya or Bahrain? I think, at the very least, there is a mood of urgency in the British camp that has yet to find its echo in Israel, amid a sense that a historic opportunity might be emerging in the Arab world.

Will that sense of urgency evolve into impatience with America, should the administration of Barack Obama prove unwilling to put more pressure on Israel over such issues as settlement building? It is too soon to say, and Mr Cameron knows full well how differently the debate over the Middle East is framed in America. But at the very least, Mr Cameron is in no hurry to conceal this difference of opinion.

Earlier on February 23rd, Mr Cameron held a joint press conference with the prime minister of Qatar, in Doha. His Qatari host raised America’s decision to veto the UN Security Council draft resolution on settlements in his opening remarks. Mr Cameron chose to respond to this in his opening remarks, declaring:

Finally, the Middle East peace process, which you spoke about. This dispute continues to fuel hate right across this region and serious, direct and substantive peace talks are needed more urgently than ever. The time for the two-state solution is running short.  Britain supported last week’s resolution in the UN Security Council because settlements are an obstacle to peace and we call today for a renewed effort to achieve long-term security for Israel and justice and statehood for the Palestinians

Britain is never going to be the country that solves the Middle East conflict. But it has traditionally been seen as a country that can build bridges between an emphatically pro-Israel America and European governments that see themselves as mentors and promoters of Palestinian development and statehood. Just now, Britain looks less like a bridge-builder between two static camps, and more like an ally that fears that the American camp is in the wrong place, and needs to move.

You must be logged in to post a comment.
Please login or sign up for a free account.
1-7 of 7
LaContra wrote:
Feb 25th 2011 7:09 GMT

Well after Blair's portrayal as a fawning US ass-sniffing Poodle, Cameron doesn't need to go so far as to be characterised as a 'froth at the mouth' Rottweiler to put the balance right.

Something independent and on the clever side?
Maybe a nice Collie, or a Weimaraner perhaps?

bampbs wrote:
Feb 26th 2011 2:17 GMT

Good for Cameron. That the US does not use its leverage to halt Israeli settlements is a disaster, for Israel most of all. The Israeli Right has no interest in a comprehensive peace. Peace would be their political death.

ObsTheTimes wrote:
Feb 26th 2011 5:26 GMT

Kudos! to David Cameron for giving the pragmatic people of Britain a voice instead of blindly kowtowing to the US.
Frankly a lot of Americans are tired of US policy's blind support of Israel and the blank check in civil and military aid given to the country.
It is this huge annual aid and strong support for Israel in Congress that encourages the country to not compromise with the Palestinians. Most of the settlements are probably funded by rich Americans from downtown Manhattan who've been brainwashed into supporting Israel.

ObsTheTimes wrote:
Feb 26th 2011 5:56 GMT

The UK can play an historic constructive role for which it will be long remembered and much more than America, by firmly stating its position and egging on Israel to recognize which way the wind is blowing.

Feb 27th 2011 4:00 GMT

Bagehot – yes it’s all right and well that Mr Cameron is trying to undo the unique disaster of Blair and return to the long-honoured, pragmatic, cross-party position held by UK Prime Ministers when it comes to the USA and foreign adventures – big up the ‘special relationship’ and now and again even throw in some minimal UK military (quasi mercenary) support, whilst never getting significantly committed to anything that is not primarily and overwhelmingly in the UK’s own strategic interests.

But Bagehot, please excuse a wee bit of a tawdry technique if I cross-refer from your earlier thread when you said:

This fuss is all bound up with a wider loss of confidence in Britain, which is bound up with our long-term relative decline and our short-term debt crisis. The country's international reach is shrinking perceptibly, and we do not like it.

I heard on the BBC radio, this Sunday, Denis McShane MP, another unblinking, unlearning, unapologetic member of the discredited Blair ensemble. He sounded bombastic and positively jingoistic in talking about what ‘we’ should be doing about Libya. His pronouncements illustrated that many UK politicians and commentators have still not got around to understanding the reality of the UK’s hugely reduced significance in world affairs; they have far less got to the stage of understanding where they ‘do not like it’.

… And so ‘we’ Brits continue with the absurd, such as; building giant aircraft carriers that are irrelevant to our status and position; that we probably cannot either afford to build nor equip them with aircraft; and that with just a touch of the delusions of grandeur name them after individual royalty.

Cutters wrote:
Feb 28th 2011 6:49 GMT

Still with the negativism toward the UK Bagehot, can't you give it a rest!

On Israel, Britain doesn't have to do anything, just keep up its objections http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-special-place-in-hell/in-israel-the-revol...

Israel is getting the the hint, after the UN vote.

Cameron need to get out there more often in the next few month and years, strengthen ties and rebuild friendships. Maybe Cameron could ask Kamalesh Sharma Secretary General of the Commonwealth of Nations to go out there and progress matter of democracy.

SoniaMR wrote:
Mar 1st 2011 12:24 GMT

Mr. Cameron can and should lead the way to a change in the West's perspective on the ME. So far he has appeared as a pragmatist when it comes to this troubled region and his public positions on the ME are more nuanced than any other western leader. It is a welcome change.

1-7 of 7

About Bagehot's notebook

In this blog, our Bagehot columnist surveys the politics of Britain, British life and Britain's place in the world.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
That 70s problem
From Buttonwood's notebook - 1 hrs 4 mins ago
The mysteries of TripAdvisor
From Gulliver - March 7th, 10:51
Hong Kong too-y
From Asia view - March 7th, 10:20
Look at that
From Babbage - March 7th, 8:48
Either a borrower or a lender be
From Babbage - March 6th, 22:31
Back to the bush
From Baobab - March 6th, 22:16
More from our blogs »
Products & events
Stay informed today and every day

Subscribe to The Economist's free e-mail newsletters and alerts.


Subscribe to The Economist's latest article postings on Twitter


See a selection of The Economist's articles, events, topical videos and debates on Facebook.

Advertisement