Britain's interests are distinct from those of the US and, though not in the same league, it is an imperialist power in its own right, with troops operating across the globe.
Franco-German view is that the US should be tied into multi-lateral agreements to their own relative advantage. Kyoto is an example. The ongoing operation in the Balkans is another.
America, though, aims to cast international cooperation in terms favourable to its own interests, understandably enough. Their favoured foreign policy initiatives have been to tie European powers into military operations - usually in the Middle East. For the US that has the advantage of politicising trade so that European attempts to reach third world markets can be undermined.
Britain, which in military terms 'punches above its [economic] weight' (former Foreign Sec. Douglas Hurd said), generally gains advantage against economic rivals when international relations are militarised. Britain generally favours a war policy (its largest foreign exports after financial ones are military).
Britain's reaction to 9/11 was two-fold: against its European neighbours, it sought the advantage by getting on board the war against terror (TWAT!) first; at the same time it tried to tie the US into a whole array of international commitments ('state-building' in Africa, etc.) that were never intended as the consequence of TWAT by the Bush team.
Britain's role is creepy, in that they are always sucking up to the schoolyard bully, and manipulative, in that they are always trying to suck him into their own enthusiasms.
In message <4.3.2.7.1.20020212082146.03d81db0 at pop3.norton.antivirus>,
Chris Burford <cburford at gn.apc.org> writes
>At 12/02/02 07:53 +0800, Greg wrote:
>>There is an element of fatal fanatsy in all this, the baby boots
>>Caligual routine is simply unrealistic and self-delusional. By
>>spurning sychophantic multi-laterialism - which admittedly was as far
>>as multi-lateralism really ever reached - is not Bush providing the
>>ground for some real multilateralism. AT one point or another his
>>"allies" will cool off completely and wonder whether more strength
>>might be obtained by a wider alliance which sidesteps America.
>
>
>I agree but I would say that this is already happening. Blair always
>had a large measure of calcuation under his sycophancy. The latest
>press reports are clearly coordinated by Campbell, including the
>astonishing "megaphone" criticism by the EU's commissioner for foreign
>affairs (if I have despite haste got the title right) - Chris Patten.
>
>And the highly authoritative report given to the Observer. A "source
>close to the Prime Minister" means the Prime Minister!
>
>Regards
>
>Chris Burford
>
>
-- James Heartfield Sustaining Architecture in the Anti-Machine Age is available at GBP19.99, plus GBP5.01 p&p from Publications, audacity.org, 8 College Close, Hackney, London, E9 6ER. Make cheques payable to 'Audacity Ltd'. www.audacity.org