International Relations in the World: United States and Europe - Literature review Example

Introduction The post cold war relationship shared by the Western world tends to have a great influence on the international politics. Within such a context, the 'special relationship' between the US and UK has always been a matter of enhanced consideration. This coalition has led to various changes in the present world order. The United Kingdom, while acting as the closest US-ally, also shares profound relationship with the European countries and thus, plays a 'bridging role' in the relationship between the US and the Europe. The current Prime Minister Tony Blair also considers this role as an important aspect of the Britain's foreign relations. The United Kingdom naturally enjoys several benefits out of this approach of coalition with the US and Europe simultaneously, while promoting the transatlantic cooperation. However, meeting the costs of the special relationship as well as balancing the coalition with the US and Europe has not been easy for the British government. The stance of providing unprecedented support to the US actions and policies has led to the growth of scepticism in the European Union as well as among the British public and party members. This paper elaborates the US-UK special relationship in the context of enhancing collaboration between the US and Europe. It then examines the cost and benefits associated with this stance of British government. UK-US Special Relationship "Bridging Role" between United States And Europe The post cold war period signifies a new geopolitical scenario encompassing the Western world. There have been conflicts, as well as concordance on world issues affecting the state of relations shared by nations. The United Kingdom, not only geographically but also politically, finds itself intimately connected with the European world and the historical 'special relationship' with the United States driven by the nations' commonly shared interests and objectives. This transatlantic relationship not only affects the British foreign policy but also influences the dimensions of relationship between the United States and the European Union. The British government, in effect, regards itself as playing a bridging role between the United States and the Europe. This relationship, according to Wallace (2005, p55), "conjures up an image of British ministers and diplomats explaining European international politics to American leaders, and interpreting American foreign policy to European governments". The British prime ministers historically have been playing eminent role in bringing European countries closer to the United States. It also happens to be an important aspect of Britain's foreign policy for the current Prime Minister Tony Blair, to balance the British relationship with the United States and the European countries as well as to promote cooperation between the US and Europe. Hence, the government undertakes rigorous efforts as a part of its foreign policy to enhance this multilateral collaboration. The historic relationship between the US and UK was further bolstered up by the 9/11 event and the United States' subsequent war on terror, whereupon Britain provided full military and political support to the American stance to wage war on Afghanistan and then Iraq. Dumbrell (2006, pp. 456-457) asserts that Tony Blair has succeeded in developing a "special relationship" with the United States channelled through its support for the war on terror; hence projecting it as the greatest US ally. The Britain's stance for bridging relationship between the US and the Europe certainly implies increasing collaboration between these countries and communicating the need to enhance multilateral cooperation leading to the achievement of their national interests. Benefit And Costs Of The Approach The approach of playing a 'bridging role' between the US and Europe relations procures significant geopolitical gains to the United Kingdom. Britain aspires to maintain its influence over the international politics and policies, but lacks resources to accomplish this objective. United States is the global power endowed abundantly with the capabilities to shape the world policies. Hence, UK perceives its coalition with US as the base for playing an eminent role in the world politics. While strengthening its connections with the United States, the country also influences the policy making in Europe through its association with the European Union. Wallace and Oliver (2004, p7) illuminate that the British foreign policy envisions the achievement of its international objectives through American coalition, which otherwise would not have been possible in view of its limited resources. While collaborating with both the United States and the European community, the Britain strives to play an influential role in the accomplishment of common objectives as a consequence of this multilateral relationship. Britain also perceives its close relations with the European Union as crucial in influencing the decision making in the Washington. Williams (2004, p922) elaborates that the foreign policy of British government in the current scenario seeks to exert influence on the United States by way of its relationship with the European Union. Britain has been quite successful in reaching the American policy makers, however, with a limited influence. Williams (2004, p923) says that the "UK appears to have a louder voice in Washington than any other European state". The UK has naturally opted for this role in view of its several national and political interests; however, pursuing this strategy is not easy. United States is the most powerful country in the world that mostly undertakes unilateral activities favourable for its national and political goals. Europe, on the other hand, tends to disfavour the US actions driven solely by unilateral objectives. Schuller and Grant (2003, p47) elaborates that, "the United States is moving on a vector towards ever greater disregard for the views of allies, while countries in Western Europe are growing more and more committed to the multilateral path". In such a situation, playing this bridging role carries both benefits as well as significant costs for the United Kingdom. Ikenberry (2001, pp. 54-61) states that in order for an institutional post-war order to be successful, it must provide both the dominant and weaker states the desired assurance i.e., the leading states need to be assured that the weaker states would pose 'self restraints' on their liberty concerning policy making, whereas, the weaker states need to be ascertained that the dominant states will be 'restraint' on itself at least insofar that it comes to a bargain position. The author argues that American experience in the post cold war period reflects the further strengthening of its position through the Western world order. Multilateral relationship with the Western world calls for a diminution of unilateral stances on the part of the US, whereas it is very difficult to assume the most hegemonic country in the present world order to follow these 'restraints'. Schuller and Grant (2003, p40) further add that, "despite preferences for multilateral collaborations, any single power as dominant as the United States is today will inevitably exercise unilateral initiatives in which no other nation either recognises responsibility or possesses the capacity and resources to participate". There happen to be several costs associated with the British strategy of playing this 'bridging role'. Wallace (2005, p56) states that British government confronts a dilemma concerning its extended intimate relationship with Europe as well as the United States. The growing domestic dissent in Britain regarding the country's integration with European Union on one side, and an incredulity pertaining the US antagonistic objectives towards Iraq as well as the European countries on the other, threaten the British government to lose public trust at home. Wallace and Oliver (2004, p8) maintain that the Britain encounters difficulties in maintaining a balanced relationship with the United States and the Europe. Tony Blair confronts antagonistic views emerging out from his own party as well as British public concerning an extended collaboration with both the sides. Wallace (2005) propounds that the Britain's policy to promote political relations with the United States has had a price in the form of subsided involvement of Britain in the European Union. He states, "the images of bridge and pivot have partly been about the avoidance of full commitment to European cooperation, picturing Britain as between Europe and the United States" (pp. 56-57). The 'special relationship' with the United States has had its own toll. The bridging role between the US and Europe is costing Britain to lose its influence over much of the EU policy-making. The American policies pressurise the Britain to confine its involvement in the European cooperation. Europe, on the other hand, views enhanced collaboration of British government with the US as detrimental to the European integration. Besides the external pressures, Tony Blair also faces negative public and party reaction concerning the demerits of UK-US cooperation. Wallace and Oliver (2004, p13) expound that, "in doing so he endangered his leadership, his government and encouraged rebellion within his own party. The price paid was to inject a further level of distrust with the French and other European partners about Britain's real intentions in the EU". Much of the costs borne by the Britain government have been the consequence of US led war on Iraq, which was fully endorsed by the UK. Wallace and Oliver (2004, p13) "the historical relationship with the US has brought significant gains, but the experience of Iraq calls into question how much longer is this relationship sustainable when little is given in return by Americans". Although much has been done on the part of British prime minister to bolster up the American stance on geopolitical issues, however the US government has done virtually nothing to enable the British government ascertain the public of the merits of relationship with the US. Despite the vigorous support and efforts demonstrated by the Blair government to assure the US of their loyalty, there has been less recognition of it on the part of the American government. Schuller and Grant (2003, p46) state that, "the record of 'special relationship' could well lead an imprudent US policy maker to take British support for granted". The United States has gained a lot from its profound relationship with the UK, particularly in the post 9/11 era in the form of the all the military and political assistance provided by its most closest ally. Britain has consequently faced agitation not only from European countries but also a harsh reaction from the voters after its support to the Iraq war. The British public regard this collaboration with US as detrimental to the Britain identity and useless for the accomplishment of Britain's international interests. Conclusion This paper focuses on the evaluation of various costs and benefits associated with the US-UK 'special relationship' and the stance of UK as bridging the relations between the United States and Europe. The Britain, in ambition to maintain its influence over the international politics, strives to balance its relationship with the US and Europe, as well as endeavours to promote multilateral transatlantic collaboration. The crux of this discussion is that the Britain has paid a high price to demonstrate its loyalty to the US objectives, both domestically and internationally. However, the British government, regards the benefits associated with its 'bridging role' to be greater than the costs underlying this approach, which is evident from the British foreign policy of supporting US actions while acting as its greatest ally. Reference List Dumbrell, John (2006) "Working with Allies: The United States, the United Kingdom, and the War on Terror", Politics & Policy, 34(2), pp. 452-472 Ikenberry, G John (2001) "After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraints, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major wars", Orinceton and Oxford: Princeton University Press Schuller, Frank and Grant, Thomas (2003) "Executive Diplomacy: Multilateralism, Unilateralism And Managing American Power", International Affairs, 79(1), pp. 37-51 Wallace, William (2005) "The Collapse Of British Foreign Policy", International Affairs, 82(1), pp. 53-68 Wallace, Williams and Oliver, Tim (2004) "A Bridge Too Far: The United Kingdom And The Transatlantic Relationship". EUI Working Papers, RSCAS No. 2004/22, European University Institute Williams, Paul (2004) "Who's making UK foreign policy", International Affairs, 80(5), pp. 909-929 Read More