There is a somewhat heated debate going on in this country (Hi, I'm a Brit.) over who exactly asked President Bush over for his little jaunt. The more cynical parts of our press are suggesting that he basically invited himself and that Tony Blair aquiesed.
There was a lot of very high handed demands made of our police and civil service both before and during the visit, some of which were turned down, others not.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the landing pads were chosen by the Americans and that there was no-one here willing to say "you can't have them there."
I find it hard to believe that, as bully-esqe as the U.S. is, the British government couldn't say, "No. The queen has other bizness that day. You can meet with your butt-wiper ... uh, I mean Mr. Blair."
I doubt we'll know the truth for a long time (30 years ...) but who exactly was going to say it?
The Queen won't, because that would mean that she was making an implicit comment about her attitude to President Bush and his relationship to her Prime Minister.
Tony Blair won't - Bush's visit was important to our Tone, and cements (in his own mind) his position at the Global Leader's club.
The Civil Service? Theirs is not to reason why, theirs but to stand and serve (to mangle two quotes completely).
There is no way that any President of the US could visit the UK and not meet the Queen - it would be an insult of massive proportions.
There is a question about why Bush was treated better than Clinton - if I recall correctly when Clinton visited he didn't get to stay at Buckingham Palace, but I'm guessing that Bush got the special treatment because Tony wanted it that way.
It was a State Visit- i.e. Head of State to Head of State, arranged over two years ago, long before the Iraq crisis and all that. Even the most important countries can't have one more than every 10 or fifteen years, or the Queen really would have clashes in her timetable. So Reagan was the last US president to get a State visit. Why Bush was next I know not. But he didn't get to address parliament- he was probably relieved! The irritation over the helicopters really has its roots in the fact that Mr. Bush was the first state guest to refuse to arrive by driving down the Mall in an open carriage (or even a closed car) with the Queen, when that is the regular form of welcome extended to all state visitors on their arrival in London.
The Queen is in a very strange position in this country. As she is the head of state, it would have been very strange (and quite insulting to President Bush) if she had not met with him.
However, she also stays as apolitical as possible. Which means if the Prime Minister and the government (who technically work for her, and swear allegiance to her) set up a meeting for her with someone, she tends to turn up. She doesn't pick and choose.
And, to be honest, whatever my personal opinions of President Bush are, there's no doubt that having the President of the US visit Britain is a significant occurrence and there should be a level of pomp and ceremony to accompany it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
There was a lot of very high handed demands made of our police and civil service both before and during the visit, some of which were turned down, others not.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the landing pads were chosen by the Americans and that there was no-one here willing to say "you can't have them there."
no subject
Maybe because
Re: Maybe because
Re: Maybe because
The Queen won't, because that would mean that she was making an implicit comment about her attitude to President Bush and his relationship to her Prime Minister.
Tony Blair won't - Bush's visit was important to our Tone, and cements (in his own mind) his position at the Global Leader's club.
The Civil Service? Theirs is not to reason why, theirs but to stand and serve (to mangle two quotes completely).
There is no way that any President of the US could visit the UK and not meet the Queen - it would be an insult of massive proportions.
There is a question about why Bush was treated better than Clinton - if I recall correctly when Clinton visited he didn't get to stay at Buckingham Palace, but I'm guessing that Bush got the special treatment because Tony wanted it that way.
Re: Maybe because
The irritation over the helicopters really has its roots in the fact that Mr. Bush was the first state guest to refuse to arrive by driving down the Mall in an open carriage (or even a closed car) with the Queen, when that is the regular form of welcome extended to all state visitors on their arrival in London.
no subject
However, she also stays as apolitical as possible. Which means if the Prime Minister and the government (who technically work for her, and swear allegiance to her) set up a meeting for her with someone, she tends to turn up. She doesn't pick and choose.
And, to be honest, whatever my personal opinions of President Bush are, there's no doubt that having the President of the US visit Britain is a significant occurrence and there should be a level of pomp and ceremony to accompany it.
no subject
Every day I seem to find out more about just how low we've stooped...
sheesh.