Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
How Nigel Farage's taunts prompted hasty offer of Trump state visit (Guardian)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/31/how-nigel-farages-taunts-prompted-hasty-offer-of-trump-state-visitThe idea of inviting the 45th president of the United States on a state visit to the UK was conceived at a time when the Conservative government was desperate to interpose itself between Donald Trump and Nigel Farage, the former Ukip leader.
The government had been blindsided by Trump’s victory, and Farage, the eternal thorn in the side of the Conservative leadership, was taunting the Foreign Office about his proximity to Trump and his chief strategist, Steve Bannon.
-snip-
Some newspapers were suggesting Farage should replace Sir Kim Darroch as the UK’s ambassador to Washington. There was even a fear that Trump, ever willing to ignore protocol, might endorse the idea.
-snip-
The invitation looks like a mistaken act of over-compensation, an effort to make sure the UK, an early backmarker, reverted to its traditional position of primus inter pares, the Special One. Since it was leaving EU, the UK simply could not afford to lose traction in Washington, and with so much flux in Trump’s thinking, Downing Street decided to throw everything it had at its disposal to retain influence with the Republicans.
Although there was an ungracious attempt by Downing Street to blame an obscure Foreign Office committee for the decision to extend the invitation – “the Foreign Office holds the pen on this” – no such invite would have been made without agreement at the highest level.
Theresa May’s two most trusted advisers, Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy, visited Washington in secret before Christmas, and the idea was discussed then, as well as policy issues such as Trump’s likely approach to Nato, Syria and a free trade agreement.
Buckingham Palace would have been consulted but does not in practice operate a veto and knows these visits are politically driven. In the national interest, the Queen has over the years had to toast a steady supply of dictators, sheikhs and wealthy leaders with an open chequebook. Only last year, the Chinese president Xi Jinping’s visit was a brutal occasion that saw backs turned and Prince Charles boycott the state banquet.
But Buckingham Palace did not object to the most remarkable aspect of the Trump invitation, its hastiness. Many US presidents have been granted state visits – Ronald Reagan in 1982, Bill Clinton in 1995, George W Bush in 2003 and Barack Obama in 2011 – but they were all after at least two relatively stable years in office.
Given the divisive nature of Trump’s election campaign and the uncertainty about how he would choose to govern, the offer of a state visit, as opposed to a normal political visit, was premature – a criticism raised by Peter Ricketts, the former Foreign Office permanent secretary in a letter to the Times published on Tuesday.
-snip-
The government had been blindsided by Trump’s victory, and Farage, the eternal thorn in the side of the Conservative leadership, was taunting the Foreign Office about his proximity to Trump and his chief strategist, Steve Bannon.
-snip-
Some newspapers were suggesting Farage should replace Sir Kim Darroch as the UK’s ambassador to Washington. There was even a fear that Trump, ever willing to ignore protocol, might endorse the idea.
-snip-
The invitation looks like a mistaken act of over-compensation, an effort to make sure the UK, an early backmarker, reverted to its traditional position of primus inter pares, the Special One. Since it was leaving EU, the UK simply could not afford to lose traction in Washington, and with so much flux in Trump’s thinking, Downing Street decided to throw everything it had at its disposal to retain influence with the Republicans.
Although there was an ungracious attempt by Downing Street to blame an obscure Foreign Office committee for the decision to extend the invitation – “the Foreign Office holds the pen on this” – no such invite would have been made without agreement at the highest level.
Theresa May’s two most trusted advisers, Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy, visited Washington in secret before Christmas, and the idea was discussed then, as well as policy issues such as Trump’s likely approach to Nato, Syria and a free trade agreement.
Buckingham Palace would have been consulted but does not in practice operate a veto and knows these visits are politically driven. In the national interest, the Queen has over the years had to toast a steady supply of dictators, sheikhs and wealthy leaders with an open chequebook. Only last year, the Chinese president Xi Jinping’s visit was a brutal occasion that saw backs turned and Prince Charles boycott the state banquet.
But Buckingham Palace did not object to the most remarkable aspect of the Trump invitation, its hastiness. Many US presidents have been granted state visits – Ronald Reagan in 1982, Bill Clinton in 1995, George W Bush in 2003 and Barack Obama in 2011 – but they were all after at least two relatively stable years in office.
Given the divisive nature of Trump’s election campaign and the uncertainty about how he would choose to govern, the offer of a state visit, as opposed to a normal political visit, was premature – a criticism raised by Peter Ricketts, the former Foreign Office permanent secretary in a letter to the Times published on Tuesday.
-snip-
