<http://www.nypost.com/> clip_image001Updated: Thu., Feb. 10, 2011, 4:51 AM


Betraying the Brits

By ARTHUR HERMAN

Last Updated: 4:51 AM, February 10, 2011

Posted: 10:57 PM, February 9, 2011

Documents from Wiki Leaks indicate that the Obama administration, des perate
to get the Russians to sign the new START treaty, agreed to pass on secret
information about the British nuclear arsenal -- right down to the serial
numbers of the warheads. 

In 2009, the United States lobbied Britain to supply Moscow with the data
needed to calculate the exact size of the British nuclear arsenal -- a
number Her Majesty's government has always kept secret. The British refused.
Now, it seems, the White House did it anyway. 

President Obama's dealings with Britain, our ally in longest good standing,
have been rocky from the start. He insulted Britain by returning a gift --
the bust of Winston Churchill that sat in the Oval Office. 

Then came the botched visit to the queen, with Obama handing her an iPod
loaded with pop tunes and his favorites speeches -- delivered by himself.
Then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested publicly that the Falkland
Islands -- which Britain fought a bloody war in 1982 to keep -- belong to
Argentina. 

But now we have something far more grave: the deliberate betrayal of
Britain's nuclear secrets to a former enemy. 

Perfidy, they must be saying in the corridors of Whitehall, thy name is
Obama. 

Certainly, the US "special relationship" with Britain, our longest-standing
ally, is at its lowest level since the 1956 Suez Crisis -- or perhaps since
the War of 1812. 

The State Department brands the nuke story "bunk," noting that, under the
previous START treaty, America has had to share data about Britain's nuclear
arsenal with the Russians since 1991, and the British know it. But even
spokesman P.J. Crowley couldn't deny that the exact number of British
nuclear warheads has always been an official Whitehall secret. 

Now it won't be, at least as far as Moscow is concerned. 

The critics ask: So what? Britain's "independent" nuclear deterrent has been
a joke for years, while its once-vaunted navy has shrunk to 10th in the
world (measured in personnel), behind Turkey and North Korea. World War II
is ancient history, they say. We have more important friends we need to
cultivate today -- including Putin's Russia. 

Yet America and Britain share more than history. The British have been our
steadiest ally in the War on Terror, not in sharing intelligence, but in
sending troops to both Iraq and Afghanistan to fight and die -- more than
530 so far. 

Under its new prime minister, David Cameron, Britain is also the one
European country that seems ready to truly confront radical Islam. In his
landmark speech at last week's Munich Security Conference, he warned that
"Europe needs to wake up" to the fact that multiculturalism has been "a
failure" and has helped to turn Britain into a "safe haven" for terrorists,
according to a recent independent report. 

Cameron now wants Britain to take its culture back and to reverse the
relativist trend that disguises cowardice as tolerance. 

There's also a more self-interested reason for keeping the special
relationship alive. 

Four Trident missile submarines are Britain's remaining claim to great-power
status. They are due to be modernized or replaced at a cost somewhere
between 11 billion and 14 billion pounds sterling -- perhaps $20 billion. 

That could mean some lucrative contracts for US shipyards -- that
manufacturing sector Obama keeps saying he's worried about. 

>From submarines to fighting terrorists and shrinking the size of government,
we still have good reasons for keeping Britain close at our side. Thanks to
Obama, a new Republican president will have his work cut out in repairing
that special relationship. 

But for the sake of Western civilization, it will be worth it. 

Arthur Herman is writing a book on the Arsenal of Democ racy. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [email protected]
  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to