Where will the biggest decisions affecting Britain be made in the next few years - the White House or Downing Street?

Ousting Maggie or Black Wednesday - Which event hurt the Tories most?

Labour or the LibDems - who's worst?

Who was the best leader: Hague, IDS or Howard?

Democrat or Republican?

Those are the four questions we've already posed in this occasional debate feature.  Today, on the eve of US Presidential elections year, the debate is whether Britain will be more affected by the outcome of the race for the White House or the battle for the keys to 10 Downing Street?

The battle for the White House will affect Britain most:  Every major problem in the world requires American leadership. The next US President could be a protectionist with massive implications for world trade.   When America's economy sneezes we catch a cold.  Much of the growth enjoyed under Gordon Brown reflects the strength of the American economy.  There'll be no progress on climate change if the White House vetoes it.  America is the only nation with the military power to deal with terrorist-supporting states.  The next President will decide what to do about Iran.  America's missile defence shield represents our best hope of protection from rogue dictators with nuclear arms.  Yes, the British election matters but there are not massive differences between the two main parties at the moment.  George Osborne has pledged to match Labour on public spending.  Conservatives won't pursue major reforms of our hospitals.  All parties take roughly the same approach to climate change.  Much of our domestic agenda is set by the EU anyway and the Tories propose no fundamental reform of our relationship with Brussels.  A Tory government will surely be a lot more competent than Labour - it couldn't be less competent - but Brown V Cameron is not Thatcher V Foot or Atlee V Churchill.

No, the battle for Downing Street obviously matters most to Britain: Britain is in decline again - economically, socially and in terms of its standing in the world.  A Conservative government will change Britain's course.  Britain will be set on a path to economic liberalisation.  Taxes will be lower.  Reforms to education, policing and family policy will begin the repair of our social fabric.  We will operate a more humble foreign policy and put national security first.  Although the choice of American President is important the differences between the Republican and Democrat candidates may not be as great as some imagine.  Despite the Democrats' rhetoric they are not going to pull out of Iraq fast and corporate America won't allow the USA to become too protectionist.  The Republican candidates will also be more open to action on climate than the Bush administration.  The most important decisions affecting Britain over the next few years will be taken in Downing Street, not in the West Wing.

Related link: Dan Hamilton predicts victory for Huckabee or Romney in Iowa but cannot predict the outcome of the Democrats' contest

Comments

[Umbrella man]

My answer is The White House.

If America withdraws from Iraq without finishing the job it will be a massive victory for al-Qaeda and the terrorist menace will explode in size and scale.

If America doesn't deal with Iran noone will. The world will change forever if Tehran becomes a nuclear power.

In an age of nuclear proliferation the missile defence shield could not be more important. Only Washington will develop it.

[MHDH]

The big decisions will, as now, all be made in Brussels reflecting the peripheral irrelevance of Westminster whilst we are members of the EU.

[Alan S]

The White House matters most, then Brussels, then Downing St.
Unfortunately we only have a vote for the least important centre of power.

[CCHQ Spy]

You could make the case that American elections nearly always matter most. In the Cold War our security depended on the USA. There was the brief period between the end of the Cold War and 9/11 when domestic policy mattered most but in this age of terror, global warming and economic interdependency I guess the hyperpower is exactly that; the hyperpower which makes all the big decisions.

[Kate Bollinger]

It's not a question that had occurred to me before. it's an astute one and I have to agree with the above comments that the White House matters more in this globalised world.
That conclusion makes the problem of anti-americanism on both sides of the political divide in the UK so urgent.
Let's not turn this into a debate into how good a Conservative government will be (as is touched on in the intro) - the question is much bigger than that.....

[christina speight]

With 80% of our laws being made in Brussels this is a "no-brain" question. We don't control economic relations, nor agricultural nor fisheries policy, or hold on taxation policy is becoming shakier by the day; immigration and asylum policy has gone to the EU, as will foreign policy under the "constitution".

We are subservient on matters such as 'drink-drive' limits, refuse disposal, carbon emissions and a host of other apparently domestic issues.

Our civil service is now largely an arm of the Brussels government passing into British law the diktats of the Brussels monster.

The only point of voting Tory at all is to loosen the stranglehold that our government in Brussels has over the British people. If they fail in that task there will be no point in voting at all - ever.

[Ian Stewart]

All and every important decision relating to the UK will be made in Brussels. When will the British public and our politicans wake up from their sleepwalking?
We have no rulers in the UK, our rulers are an unlected bunch of prats in Brussels!

[The Huntsman]

We have seen with the issue of deporting EU Nationals convicted of crimes an example of where the power now lies.

Brussels and The White House figure largely, Downing Street barely, Parliament not at all in the decision making process.

The choice is simple: learn to do your Master in Brussels' bidding or take power back so that decisions are made in the interests of the British people once more.

[Umbrella man]

The EU is useless for Britain;s security though. In a dangerous world it is America that matters.

[R.Baker.]

Take your heads out of the sand,Brussels and the EU rule UK,OK?

Try to deny it,anyone of you.

[Buckinghamshire Tory]

On foreign policy, it is of course Washington that will matter the most. That is just natural, and the way it has been since the fall of the Soviet Union. The UK can of course have some impact. The war in Iraq is good example. If the British army stays in Basra until the job is done, we can ease the situation for the American forces further north, thus making victory more likely. Iraq is an important theatre, so our involvement there can make a real difference.

Domestic policy is different though. Our economy is of course affected by the decisions made in Washington. If the American elect a protectionist like Huckabee or Hillary Clinton it will be bad for our economy, which again will affect the domestic policy. If this sparks a trend were other countries turn to protectionism, then we will all be worse off.

However, the only ones who can mend the broken society or put a stop to the benefits culture are us, as a people. The most important policies on those areas can only be made here in Britain.

[Steevo]

Basra is already in the process of being taken over by massive Iraqi security deployment and strategic shifting of Coalition forces. The UK with all due honor can let Iraq go.

Hillary is not a protectionist, she's a globalist. She will work heavily with the same rotten institutions as the UK: the EU and UN.

"However, the only ones who can mend the broken society or put a stop to the benefits culture are us, as a people. The most important policies on those areas can only be made here in Britain."

That's the bottom line. If you can make inroads here to stop the multicultural/statism you may also find you have a strong enough hand to break the EU's grip.

On the other hand, if we Americans vote in a Democrat ours will be weaker internationally as well as domestically.

[Philip]

Neither White House or Downing Street. Brussels is where decisions on so many matters are made now. So I agree with MHDH (1346) and christina speight (1508). But to what extent will Mr Cameron free us to become a sovereign nation again?

But the White House should have the greatest influence with respect to international terrorism and the possibility of Iran becoming nuclear, as it seems only the US is capable of taking whatever action is necessary to defend us.

[Malcolm Dunn]

The Downing Street election matters far more than who wins in the White House. Was Britain transformed between 1979-90 by anything that happened in the USA? Not really.

[Matt Wright]

Of course the US will tend to have a major influence on global events and thus the political and economic climate generally. However we make what we want of the world and our time as Conservatives is here again, we must seize it and lead Britain.

[Buckinghamshire Tory]

"Basra is already in the process of being taken over by massive Iraqi security deployment and strategic shifting of Coalition forces. The UK with all due honor can let Iraq go."

That is what Gordon Brown is saying, but several sources tell different stories. For example Major General Jalil Khalaf, the new police commander for Basra. He says "They left me militia, they left me gangsters, and they left me all the troubles in the world".

Marie Colvin reports the following in the Sunday Times:

"The level of lawlessness is striking even during a short visit to Basra. On my first day,a male relative of the family I was staying with was kidnapped driving into Basra. A series of desperate calls began to try to find him. It has become a well-established ritual. The next day, waiting in the anteroom of Major-General Farid Mohan, commander of the army in Basra, I asked the man next to me if he was okay. He had two black eyes and lumps on his bald head. It turned out he was the leader of the first ministry of finance delegation to visit Basra in five months. He had been kidnapped and tortured. Mohan had negotiated his release hours earlier.

Iyad Ahmed sat slumped forward in the grey dishdasha (robe) and leather sandals that he had on when he was kidnapped from his room at the Qusr Al-Sultan, the best hotel in Basra. He had arrived 20 days earlier to investigate the ports and borders. “When I was kidnapped, I was investigating the theft of 653 new cars stolen from the international free zone in the middle of the afternoon. The thieves killed the guard at the gate as they drove the cars out.” Following the trail, the ministry team found that 90 of the cars had been used in assassinations, and 35 in suicide bomb attacks.""

[Malcolm Dunn]

I wouldn't take to much notice of Steevo Buckinghamshire Tory. He is a rather deluded ignoramus who seems to believe in the ability of the Iraqi government to impose order in all its provinces. Any attempt to debate this with him brings forth snarls of anti Americanism.Poor fool.

[Steevo]

Malcolm you have to be the most derogatory influence in these forums, at least at B and A where a number of the regular Americans can't stand you. You're responsible for Tim having to censure.

Who ever you are you need to deal with facts. Back yourself up. And grow up. Too many times you don't add much more than cheap insult. You've gone out of your way to point out errors in spelling and grammar thinking you can discredit those you're in disagreement with when you show the same imperfections. You go out of your way to intentionally provoke, totally irrelevant to the discussion. Its been this way for you online here to be a low level poster more than anyone else I've read.

Buckingham Torie its far from pleasant there but its a process in transition like most other provinces Iraq has experienced. I'm confident sooner or later order will be established along with the balance of ongoing progress. You can believe otherwise.

Read my responses here for a more full perspective:

http://britainandamerica.typepad.com/britain_and_america/2007/12/
man-of-the-year.html

[Editor]

That's a really unhelpful comment Malcolm. Please ignore Steevo if he bothers you.

[Martin Cox]

"...80% of decisions made in Brussels..."

By voting so much of our laws to the EU, our Government has in large measure voted itself out of its purpose.
The result is that parliament spends its time on matters which are none of its business, meddling in education, hunting, banking and business, to mention just a few areas.
The answer is far fewer MPs, and only token representation from the devolved countries. A House of 400 would be adequate for what important matters remain, and not more than about 20 Quangoes can really be needed. The saving in costs would allow huge tax reductions, and great increases in efficiency and national prosperity.

[Buckinghamshire Tory]

Steevo: Sir, I am certain that a lot of progress have been made by our soldiers stationed in Basra, and their Iraqi-allies.
I am no military expert, but I beleive that we should keep a substantial force there for one ot two more years.
That would ensure that the Iraqi troops are fully prepared when the British soldiers actually leaves.

As everyone else, I want to see our enlisted men and women come home to the safety of Britain, but it is better that we retain a military presence in Basra for a few years, so that the British Army doesn't have to return there in a decade to deafeat the insurgents again.

[Malcolm Dunn]

I'm sorry you think my comments unhelpful Tim. They are nevetheless accurate.

[Comstock]

However strongly we feel one way or the other about Iraq or the 'war on terror' the things that affect our lives are health, education, pensions, housing, minimum wage levels and so on, so to me the UK election will always be the most important.

To some extent I must confess I agree with the statement "but there are not massive differences between the two main parties at the moment", however I do think the differences that *do* exist (like the minimum wage) are important ones. And I would question how long George Osborne will stick with Labour spending plans, especially when the grassroots start calling for tax cuts for the middle class.

[Steevo]

I have mixed feelings Buckinghamshire Tory, I actually believe its for the better that your troops leave. Its better for Britain and probably, better for Basra. Its rather complicated as to why most, but by no means all of the residents there resented them. Many chalk it up to policy in so far as the nature of the troops' overall mission and lack of interaction not forming a bond and this is not their fault, it is the fault of those making strategic policy. In the end, their presence actually contributed to inflaming more hard violence. There has been significant reduction in death since they no longer patrol.

I want to emphasize this is not a failure on their part, they could only do what they were permitted. When in battle with hardened insurgents they fought, hard, and every bit that of the Americans. Let me suggest you go to Michael Yon's web site and read his embedded experience with them during the late spring of this year. You'll be proud.

[John Smith]

"The EU is useless for Britain;s security though"

That would be the fault of the foot-dragging tropophobic Tories who refuse to allow Europe to grow into its role on the world stage, and assume the mantle of leadership which befits it.