Return to: Home | Politics | UK Politics

'Cameron's a lightweight'

James Macintyre

Published 04 December 2008

David Cameron has made much of his rapport with Barack Obama, but his views on Europe clearly left the president-elect baffled

''Cameron is a lightweight''

The second-biggest rally addressed by Barack Obama this year, aside from his victory speech in Chicago on 4 November, was on 24 July in Berlin, when the then Democratic candidate for president set out his vision before 200,000 people for a closer alliance between the US and Europe.

Two days later, at the conclusion of his Continental tour, after seeing first Tony Blair for breakfast and then Gordon Brown in Downing Street, Obama met David Cameron, the Conservative leader, in a sunny corner of New Palace Yard at the Houses of Parliament.

The initial part of the conversation was picked up by an American ABC News microphone: an inane exchange, instigated by Cameron, about the need to take regular breaks. "You should be on the beach," said the Tory, with Obama agreeing that "you've got to refresh yourself".

What is not publicly known is that there was less agreement when, soon afterwards, the discussion turned substantial in Cameron's Commons office. Obama began by saying that he hoped to work closely with the EU. But, in a crude attempt to demonstrate his Atlanticist credentials, Cameron went on to indulge in what one source has described as an "anti-European diatribe", repeatedly referring to the "anti-Americanism" of EU member states. Cameron apparently told Obama that he would not encounter a more pro-American politician than himself.

If Cameron thought this would impress Obama, he was wrong. It would appear he had failed to study the multilateralist candidate's Berlin speech 48 hours previously. Obama had condemned "voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe's role in our security and our future", and went on: "Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe . . . But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together . . . In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more - not less. Partnership and co-operation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our . . . humanity. That is why the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another."

On meeting Cameron, Obama was, according to diplomatic sources, "distinctly unimpressed", contrary to some reports (excitedly spun by the Conservatives) which suggested that the two men had formed an instant "bond". Instead, I have been told, Obama exclaimed of Cameron after their meeting: "What a lightweight!" He apparently also asked officials about Tory Euroscepticism. Soon, word about the rather awkward encounter between the two self-professed candidates of change made its way quietly round the upper echelons of Whitehall.

A widely read, broad-minded internationalist, Obama has long valued Europe and, asked during the primaries against Hillary Clinton to name the crucial US allies, he instantly placed "the European Union" at the top of the list. Perhaps more importantly, on defining international issues such as the invasion of Iraq (unlike Clinton and certainly unlike Cameron), Obama's position was closer to that of mainstream Europe - which, as led by President Jacques Chirac of France, tended to be more "doveish" than "hawkish".

Indeed, it is one of many symptoms of the British media's love affair with Cameron that his support for the disastrous invasion of Iraq is now seldom mentioned. Cameron, who also talked of the need for "judgement" in his chat with Obama, was among those Tories backing the then-leader Iain Duncan Smith, despite opposition from a considerable faction within the party. This group was led by Kenneth Clarke, who correctly predicted that the Iraq misadventure would bring terror to Britain's streets.

Today, Cameron's closest aides are the shadow schools minister, Michael Gove, an ideological neoconservative, and George Osborne, who opposed David Davis's attempts to force the Tories to take a civil-libertarian approach in opposing the government's anti-terrorist measures. Both Hague and Osborne were present at the meeting with Obama, yet Cameron's, Hague's and Osborne's approaches to the issues of the day are diametrically opposed to those of the president-elect. This is why the Tory leader's attempts to cash in on Obama's message of "change" and to compare himself to the Democrat were always so absurd.

And although Obama has dismayed many supporters and threatened his own image as a progressive change-maker by appointing the previously pro-war Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, most of his team do not like what they know of British Conservatism. Susan Rice, the new US ambassador to the United Nations, entered politics partly in horror at Tory refusal to intervene in the Balkans or in the Rwandan genocide of 1994. Joe Biden, the incoming vice-president, has said that when he examined the Tory policy of appeasing Slobodan Milosevic in the 1990s he could hear "the tap, tap, tap of Chamberlain's umbrella at Munich".

Obama's incoming national security adviser, James Jones, led Nato and was the EU's favourite American general. At a time when the new team at the White House wants to build bridges with Europe, Cameron's fervent hostility to the EU will cause dismay.

As a senior Labour source said: "Obama will want to work with a united Europe, not the 27 divided nations envisaged by a David Cameron, William Hague and [the Eurosceptic backbencher] Bill Cash vision of Europe. Tory isolationism is the last thing Obama's new foreign policy team will want from London."

Cameron continues to preside over the most anti-European parliamentary party in Conservative history. He has threatened to withdraw from the right-wing European People's Party grouping, much to the embarrassment of some leading Tory MEPs. The disclosure that his ideological opposition to Europe has disappointed Obama is also likely to cause considerable embarrassment - and not just to the Conservative leader himself.

Hear more on this story on Newsweek Scotland: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00fvbrz

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

17 comments from readers

Architect
04 December 2008 at 12:16

It would seem that we are moving towards the vision of a long life, loose-fit, low energy and low carbon economy. As our way of life changes, organizing ourselves into larger political entities makes it easier for leaders to communicate and then cajole, legislate and enforce people into following the new direction. Europe is at the start of becoming such a bigger entity, so naturally it will become the target for Obama to liaise with. But to make the liaison work, Europe should become a social, political and economic union. That is the work to undertake and goal to pursue. So let our politicians, and ourselves, be fully involved with Europe, work closely with the USA, avoid scepticism , and save the planet.

Hannibal
04 December 2008 at 12:55

This smells fishy.

If this is true, don't you think it astonishing that it has taken nearly six months to reach the public domain?

It's not like Obama to make comments like that, he's always appeared diplomatic to the core when dealing with foreigners.

So I ask myself, why did it take 6 months? What event occurred between then and now?

That's right, Mandelson had risen spinning from the grave...

Nilsey105
04 December 2008 at 15:39

Hannibal

You may be correct.

But then i may have the right line on what is being said.

Undoubtedly we as a nation are going to have to position ourselves closer to europe rather than to move further away. Reasons for this are miriad.

The experiment of playing with neoliberal economics and neocon politics has seriously burnt the hands,and not just fingers, of all those involved.

If we are going to forge a new economic/political system we have to seek alliances not with the USA alone.

Our main trading partners are those within the EU, we export 60% of our goods to EU countries.

Citizens of the EU freely cross each others borders be it for work, leisure, holidays or to move house and home.

I dont think its, astonishing, in that its taken nearly six months to enter the public domain.

It is obvious it would have damaged Obama's election chances if it had become common knowledge prior to the election.

One thing i do agree with you on is it certianly smells if its fish or some other substance i dont know.

From what the author is saying and with a General election within the next 18 months, there is very little chance of Obama going to give any support to the Conservatives.

In fact, it looks, from the article, as if the least that will happen is negative spin from across the pond will prevail towards Cameron et al.

As Europe moves closer towards a left / left of center position in its economic and political thinking so to must the UK. This is going to be no place for the likes of the Tory or right wing.

This also means if Labour is to maintain power it has to rethink its position and discharge the right wing policy it has held for the previous decade into the dustbin of history.

Rob Atkins
04 December 2008 at 17:21

Have you by any chance been speaking to the Dishonorable M'Lord Mandelson, Mr Macintyre ? This smacks of one of his routine smears. Unless of course you have corroboration, and are not simply pedalling gossip ?

seankippin
04 December 2008 at 20:21

I do hope this is true. There can be nothing more

ridiculous than Cameron trying to associate himself

with Obama as an 'agent of change'. The President

elect rightly decried the dogma that says 'if you give

more and more to those at the top then the rest will

trickle down' - the very fountain from which Cameron,

Osbourne and Hague drink.

Furthermore, Cameron's claim to be 'the most pro

american politician in the world' or whatever guff he

exhaled is hardly likely to impress Obama. He doesn't

want subservience from a British PM - look where

that's gotten us recently - he wants serious, analytical

people who share his agenda, and a key part of that is

engagement with multilateral institutions, using the

state to achieve stated social goals and an end to

market subservience... the very antithesis of Dave's

brand of PR Thatcherism.

gnuneo
04 December 2008 at 21:20

mmm, yes, whereas of course Bwown has always made his support for the EU so clear... LOL

lightweights... just how many non-lightweight politicians are there in the entire West? Is Obama 'heavyweight'? Or are whatever prejudices he has 'heavyweight' simply because he has such a vast and murderous military machine behind him?

i don't doubt that this article could be true, because, well, it is. Camoron IS a lightweight, a pretty-boy public-schooler. However the yoke that NuLabour is trying to control us with is anything BUT light, and it would require a level of optimism that is now beyond me to imagine that Obama is going to 'roll back' the military Imperialism of the US any time soon.

also, if the EU continues its current social-democracy trends:

http://www.newstatesman.com/europe/2008/12/socialist-party-s...

then it is not outside the realms of possibility that Obama and his handlers will find themselves becoming somewhat disenchanted with the EU - i can't see Rome (oops, AMERICA) appreciating a non-Imperial economic system that is demonstrably out-performing the straightforward plutocratic, neo-feudal multinational controlled MIComplex economy of the US.

Scandinavia can be ignored by the US media - the whole EU cannot.

david skitmore
05 December 2008 at 07:10

Cameron's a lightweight!!! and Obama's a great fantastic brilliant world statesman. The left do so love their leaders, it will all end in disappointment. Obama will end up another washout left-wing politician just like president Mugabe.

eprice
05 December 2008 at 11:14

As a senior Labour source said: "Obama will want to work with a united Europe, not the 27 divided nations envisaged by a David Cameron, William Hague and [the Eurosceptic backbencher] Bill Cash vision of Europe. Tory isolationism is the last thing Obama's new foreign policy team will want from London."

Name the source ... go on, just for once, stop indulging the spin and name the person who has supplied this information - and upon which you appear to base your 'information' for this article.

Gerry Myer
05 December 2008 at 11:46

After the Lord Mayor’s show comes the muck cart. Six fairly constructive intelligent observations followed by David Skitmore’s ridiculous comparison of Obama with Mugabe. No doubt NS readers will be disappointed in time with Obama but only because our expectations are too high; he has no record of being a megalomaniac and psychopath.

Cameron is transparently a lightweight, gimmick-seeking, opportunist, preoccupied with party-political point-scoring, like almost all of our politicians. I can think of few, notably Vince Cable, who see it as it is and tell it as it is. The sad fact - that politics attracts the very people who should never have political power – is true for all parties – even the Greens.

John Warren Gotsch
06 December 2008 at 06:54

Obama does not talk like this;

everything is kept very close to the

vest. I don't doubt that Obama thinks

Cameron is a lightweight for he is. If I

may, I don't find too many British

heavyweights these days. anyway.

John warren Gotsch, Budapest

amanfromMars
06 December 2008 at 09:07

It is rather bizarre, and probably also true, that politicians and bankers, no longer Control the System after their Systemic Abuse of IT and Supply of Snake Oil/Ghost Accounts with Neither Stock nor Intellectual Property to Deliver.

This thus Rendering them as Parasitic Viruses on a Consummate Host. They are an Arrogant Sinecure with Delusions of Imperial Grandeur/Absolute Power?

And only a Question if you would disagree.

Valrie
08 December 2008 at 08:57

"Partnership and co-operation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our . . . humanity. That is why the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another." Isn't this as prophesied in Daniel & Revelation? THE ONE WORLD ORDER

max caulfield
09 December 2008 at 03:57

The problem is less anti-Europe Toryism than the irrelevancy of U.K. Coming up from Chicago street politics the way he did, and being immigrant stock, the then presidential candidate was more ready to disappoint that conventional myth of an Anglo-American special relationship and Cameron certainly would not have helped (or have unknowingly conspired in) matter. Remember this was still pre-Election.

More likely, for all the change vernacular, and as events has borne out, it has a great deal to do with our President-elect's foreign policy framework which differs not materially if not at all from the prevalent U.S hegemony paradigm. Last thing to be desired is a declining ex-colonial power punching above its international weights and demanding joint billing.

MaterialMonkee
13 December 2008 at 11:11

"the very antithesis of Dave's brand of PR Thatcherism"

Hmmmm very very wrong on the economic policy, Obama's economic advisor is Austan Goolsbee,

who is a Proffessor at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business home of one Milton Friedmann. The ideology Goolsbee subscribes to is an economic system named Libertarian Paternalism, which was developed by a Professor from teh same department named Richard Thaler. The system is a form of behavioural economics, that is best surmised in the book Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (Yale University Press, 2008).

How does this fit in with Cammeron? Well he is also a self described Libertarian Paternalist. Ie Obama and Cammeron are reading off the same economic policy book.

"As Europe moves closer towards a left / left of center position in its economic and political thinking so to must the UK. This is going to be no place for the likes of the Tory or right wing"

Wouldn't say this at all judging by whats happening over the pond.

Bush has overseen the bailout of Wallstreet which was one of the most technically left wing moves in US history. Obama supported this. Bush has proposed the bail out of the big three auto makers which is another technically left wing move and suprise suprise Obama has supported this aswell. Obama and Bush are basically pursuing the same economic choices.

The Repulican's and Democrats, just like Labour and the Conservatives, claim to have ideological diffrences on economics but bend consistently to the current wind that's in vogue. Harrold Macmillan (a UK conservative) was far to the left of Gordon Brown and supported nationalisation of industry or state capitalism as he called it. Bill Clinton (a Democrat) supported technically right wing policies such as deregulation of the finance market and free trade agreements.

MaterialMonkee
13 December 2008 at 11:12

The fact of the matter is all the major parties in the anglosphere talk ideologically on economics but act exactly as is currently in vogue so I don't see any problems with the Conservatives moving back to technically left wing policy even if they're mouthing something else.

I'll be sending my postal vote for teh Lib Dems but if the Tories win at least new fecking labours ID cards will get the chop.

As for this story on Cameron

Wise man once say no linkee no belivee

This just seems like the kind of tabloid crap you read in the Mirror

arias
24 December 2008 at 10:05

Sorry Mr McIntyre but your story lacks credulity. If Obama is anything, he is a very disciplined and shrewd individual and politician. He is measured and methodical, and is not going to be impetuously exclaiming 'what a lightweight' within earshot of any British official at the tail end of his European PR tour in the thick of his presidential campaign when he was mentally and physically exhausted, even if he were the type to think or talk like that ... but he's not. It is ridiculously out of character of Obama to speak pretentiously and recklessly like that of one of the leaders of a foreign ally, even if he were (and he does) have a major difference of opinion with Cameron. He's gone out of his way to defend and be respectful to those that hold different political opinions from his own and has always encouraged dissenting views, dating back to his days as professor of constitutional law at U of Chicago and as can be seen in the assembly of his 'cabinet of rivals'. He is not the type to make snap character judgments where he would instantly speak of that person with condescension and derision, much less in proximity of that person's own countrymen. He is a very disciplined man of even temperament that simply lacks the ingrained prerequisite hotheaded bombast to say such a thing. If it were claimed to come from McCain's mouth, it would be far more believable. Sorry, but this fairy tale just doesn't have the legs to appear possible, even if the intentions behind the smear were good being to further humiliate conservatives.

The Ink Slinger
01 March 2009 at 13:26

Nilsey105

Ah, the classic "EU is our principal trading partner" gambit.

Much good it does us when our trade deficit with the EU is over £40bn annually, and we are prohibited from making agreements with our natural partners in the commonwealth, with China and with Brazil.

If the article above is true, and I have my doubts, good luck to Obama trying to engage with the Euro Borg. His alleged enthusiasm for a partnership with the EU demonstrates a major gap in his learning for such a keen student of history.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

About the writer

James Macintyre

James Macintyre is political correspondent for the New Statesman.

Read More

Vote!

Will Baroness Ashton be an effective EU foreign minister?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker