Articles:
War and intelligence, a connection that remains
29.03.10 Publication: Corriere della Sera
Having fought two wars together in the past nine years, neither of which yielded great honour or achievements, it may be natural for America and Britain to sit back and have a long cool think about quite what these two countries’ “special relationship” means. The Foreign Affairs Committee of Britain’s House of Commons (the main chamber of Parliament) has gone further, in a statement this weekend, by saying that the British media and British politicians should no longer talk about “the special relationship”, or use that phrase, which was invented by none other than Winston Churchill in a speech in 1948. Inevitably, people will conclude from this that the relationship between
This conclusion would be wrong. Throughout my journalistic career, which now goes back 30 years, people have questioned every few years whether Britain and America really live up to Churchill’s phrase. The truth every time is the same. And it is no different now.
The truth comes in three parts. The first is that the one thing that is truly special about the British-American relationship is our ability to trust each other with secrets, with intelligence work. Ever since the Second World War, the foreign intelligence service with which the various American intelligence agencies have worked most closely is Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, popularly known as MI6—and the employer of the fictional 007, James Bond. The Americans do co-operate with other European spy services, of course, but by far their closest ties are with the British. This dates back both to wartime co-operation against
The second part is that the relationship is also a little bit special in times of war, for the Americans know that among their allies, the country likeliest to fight alongside them is
The third part, however, is that it is significant that the phrase “special relationship” was invented by a British leader, and not an American one. The “specialness” has always been felt more strongly on the British side. That is why the American media almost never use the phrase, but the British media use it a lot. British prime ministers care deeply about whether they are invited to the White House or
So there is nothing really new about the Foreign Affairs Committee’s observation. Certainly, it reflects some of the political fall-out from the
The Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons is not an important or influential body. Foreign policy in