Fw: Terrorist coalition splitting?

Joe R. Golowka joeG at ieee.org
Thu Nov 8 20:29:07 PST 2001



> Article by: The Guardian - & a response from Pravda
> Thursday 08 Nov 2001
>
> Summary:\"The sense of frustration in Britain is echoed in Germany where a
row has erupted over ...\" (Guardian)
> \"Here you go. No comments. We wonder how Britain is going to react to
such a statement.\" (Pravda)
>
> Reference at indymedia website:
http://www.indymedia.org:8081//front.php3?article_id=86175
>
> Article:
> \"Splits open in UK-US alliance \"
>
> Ewen MacAskill and Richard Norton-Taylor
> Friday November 9, 2001
> The Guardian
>
> British ministers privately expressed frustration yesterday with the US
prosecution of the war against terrorism, the first sign of serious differences between London and Washington since the attacks on September 11.
>
> Although Tony Blair saw his quick trip to Washington this week as an
opportunity to cement Britain\'s position as the No 1 ally of the US, unease is growing in Whitehall.
>
> There is concern on both the military and diplomatic fronts over the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict; the bombing strategy; perceived lack of US consultation with its allies; and insufficient US focus on the humanitarian crisis.
>
> The British government is also intent on opposing the expansion of the war
beyond Afghanistan and is horrified at elements within the Pentagon pushing for an all-out assault on Iraq.
>
> The handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the main source of
dispute, with Downing Street and the Foreign Office worried that dithering in Washington in its handling of the peace process risks alienating Arab opinion, which is seen as crucial in the coalition against terrorism.
>
> Mr Blair, who experienced at first hand last week during a trip to the
Middle East the extent of Arab anger, pressed President George Bush in Washington on Wednesday to apply pressure on Israel to return to peace talks.
>
> But Mr Blair suffered a rebuff yesterday when it emerged that Colin
Powell, the US secretary of state, will not be making a long-heralded speech at the UN general assembly this weekend in support of the creation of a Palestinian state. The speech had been flagged as a historic shift in US policy towards Israel, representing a significant move towards the Palestinian position.
>
> It has been expected for two months. Even on Wednesday, as Mr Blair was on
his way to Washington, Downing Street was briefing that Mr Powell was poised to take a firm line with Israel.
>
> One British minister said that the content of Mr Powell\'s speech was not
in doubt, just the timing. The minister said the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, had acted abominably in recent weeks.
>
> Mr Bush is to make a speech to the general assembly tomorrow, but Foreign
Office sources said he was unlikely to use the opportunity to make the historic statement.
>
> There is also rising anxiety within Whitehall that after Afghanistan the
Bush administration may turn its sights on Iraq.
>
> Mr Bush said on Wednesday that the bombing of Afghanistan was just the
start of the war on terrorism.
>
> One British minister said that bombing Iraq would be catastrophic because
women and children would be killed and the consequences for the US and Britain in the Arab world would be unimaginably dangerous.
>
> He warned that US and British embassies in the Arab world would have to
close and British civilians would have to be advised to leave the area. He feared that moderate Arab regimes would be swept away.
>
> The sense of frustration also applies to defence and military circles.
British defence officials recognise that Washington is calling the shots. But there is growing impatience about US delays in deploying and giving tasks to ground troops, including some 100 SAS troops believed to be in Afghanistan or nearby.
>
> One senior minister even spoke disparagingly about General Tommy Franks,
the US commander of Operation Enduring Freedom, describing him as an \"artillery man\" reluctant to commit infantry.
> British military planners made it clear they are extremely concerned about
the failed raid by US rangers on targets near Kandahar on October 20 and the decision to release a video of it for propaganda reasons.
>
> There are some 70 British military officers assigned to the Florida
headquarters of Gen Franks. They are said to be providing valuable advice, yet there is a growing feeling in London that it is not being publicly recognised, defence sources say.
>
> \"You\'re not the only ones,\" one well-placed source said yesterday,
referring to Washington\'s failure to acknowledge publicly Britain\'s contribution.
>
> British defence sources point to what they say is the valuable task
carried out by RAF pilots refuelling American aircraft and undertaking reconnaissance over Afghanistan.
>
> The sense of frustration in Britain is echoed in Germany where a row has
erupted over whether the US had requested the 3,900 troops Berlin has earmarked for operations in Afghanistan.
> The US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, initially denied having made
the request for German troops.
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,590474,00.html
>
>
> ..................
>
> And a response from \'Pravda\'.......
>
> Pravda - 19:31 2001-11-08
>
> \"ANTI-TERRORIST COALITION IS SPLITTING \"
>
> The anti-terrorist coalition is splitting. Great Britain is not happy with
its role as a participant with no will and no influence, a role that has been prepared by the United States. Britain can not tolerate the humiliation. Tony Blair, who has always been supportive towards the American president, gave a rather pessimistic estimation of the efficiency of Afghanistan's bombing.
>
> The British prime minister arrived in Washington in to discuss the
military strategy in Afghanistan with George Bush. First and foremost, both leaders claimed that they were sure of the victory over terrorism, no matter how much time the struggle will take. At the same time, Britain has a lot of questions for its ally. In particular, the announced participation of the British commandos in the land operation has been delayed for an indefinite period of time. This can not but cause concern for the Pentagon, but as their chief Donald Rumsfeld said, "the terrorists challenged America and America is ready to answer it, like it or not." Rumsfeld was even more precise about Britain: "England executes only representative functions, the goal of which is to give more significance to the coalition."
>
> Here you go. No comments. We wonder how Britain is going to react to such
a statement.
>
> Dmitry Litvinovich
> PRAVDA.Ru
>
> http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/11/08/20431.html
>
>
>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list