President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown arriving at a press conference at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London today. (Photo by Chris Harris / WPA Pool / Getty Images)
by Christi Parsons
LONDON -- Which is better, a "special partnership" or a "special relationship"?
For observers watching the courtship of President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown here this week, it matters.
In the past, evidently, "relationship" was the preferred term, and the recent use of "partnership" by some American officials has inspired complaints of a downgrade in the British press.
Now there's a whole new lexicon under consideration, worth a briefing booklet put together by the White House for reporters traveling with the president tossing around phrases like "strong bilateral relationship" and "close coordination."
American suitors stymied by the nuances along the friend/girlfriend/fiancee continuum have nothing on this diplomatic discourse.
Whatever you call the national relationship, on a personal level the first couples are getting to know their counterparts in the Uk today. The president and first lady got together this morning with Brown and his wife, Sarah, and, as the leaders had breakfast at the prime minister's residence at 10 Downing Place, the women were touring a cancer center in London.
Later in the day, the Obamas will travel to Buckingham Palace for a meeting with Queen Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh. This evening, while the leaders of the G-20 nations have a working dinner, Michelle Obama will attend a dinner and sit next to Harry Potter author JK Rowling. After the meal -- prepared by celebrity chef Jamie Oliver -- Mrs. Brown will take the spouses out for opera.
That sounds like first-date material, which comes well short of "partnership" status in the American relational lexicon. But then again, we're as stumped as White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who shrugged off an offer to parse meaning.
"I continue to be mystified," he said, "by the difference between the two words."
Comments
I guess the U.S. need to accept the suggestions of the E.U., and the E.U.and the other nations need to adopt an advanced smart grid technology, which is worth the deficit for job creation and economic activity, is something to do ultimately.
I think like USA, the world economy also urgently needs job creation, and like internet, the global economy requires common ground, that is why The World-Wide Green New Deal is necessary.
We can not rebuild grand economy on the volatile, declining energy base( as previous stimulus packages for the oil-based industry all over the world have not worked well), instead, the world has enough technology and its potential to reshape energy system, I suppose.
China, India and the other overpopulated areas consume massive energy, amid the declining oil reserve,and so without a new effective alternative energy system, we can not expect renewed economy prosperity, and that is why 'the global green new deal' is required, I think.
Thank you !
Posted by: hsr0601 | April 1, 2009 10:33 AM
While visiting Maggie’s Cancer Center, Michelle Obama attended a Look Good…Feel Better ® session and visited with two cancer patients enrolled in the program. For more information on Look Good…Feel Better visit www.LookGoodFeelBetter.org.
Posted by: Courtney | April 2, 2009 12:29 PM