Friday, December 08, 2006

Grounds for Divorce

Writers of contemporary history and current events are always faced with an almost insoluble problem. The pace of modern history is such that, by the time their thoughts have been transcribed into print, time and tide have probably negated all of their best efforts. The situation will have changed, rendering their carefully worded theses and erudite prognostications only a matter of record – and probably an inaccurate one at that.

When I started to write my latest book, “Grounds for Divorce,” it was a problem uppermost in my mind. Some three years ago I had conceived the idea of a parallel history of the United States and Great Britain, emphasising that, although their respective peoples were on the best of terms, the relationship between the two governments had not been quite so hunky-dory over the years. While the project was still very much on the back burner, the war in Iraq made it a matter of far greater interest and the manuscript was more or less completed by the time of the run-up to the election in the United States that would result in a second term for George W. Bush.

Since the result of this would possibly change so many of the arguments predicated in the book, the decision was made to delay publication.

Unfortunately for the rest of the world but happily for my book, subsequent events have done little to alter matters. Of course, it is always regrettable that last minute changes are not possible. For instance, the rapidly deteriorating situation in Iraq would probably deserve a greater emphasis, but the essential argument remains the same.

Britain and America are good friends – but not brothers-in-arms.

The United States owes its current pre-eminence in the world due to two reasons. The gritty determination of its citizens who have inherited the pioneering spirit of their forefathers and their nation’s fortuitous geographical location.

Not until 2001 had any enemy succeeded in attacking the homeland, excluding a trivial attempt by the Japanese with their balloon bombs during the Second World War. War only came home to America through casualty lists and stories of the returning fighting men, representing a miniscule proportion of the population. Cities had not been laid to waste, manufacturing facilities remained untouched and starvation had never threatened its peoples. War meant something totally different to the average American than it did to the British.

During the war, the British fought alone following the defeat of France. Churchill, half American himself, saw only too clearly that in order to shorten the conflict (at the time he could not have foreseen Hitler’s rash decision to invade Russia), he would have to bring the United States into the conflict. In order to encourage a reluctant President Roosevelt, he made some extraordinary concessions, concessions which would have long-term lasting effects upon the British peoples. The myth of the Trans-Atlantic Alliance was born and has remained ever since in the minds of the government of Great Britain.

Yesterday, Prime Minister Blair and President George W. Bush re-iterated this in their support for a war that was both illegal and unnecessary.

For once, it’s comforting to see that my book on contemporary history has not been in error. Current events make it as viable an argument as it was those years ago when I first put pen to paper.

Now for the commercial:

“GROUNDS FOR DIVORCE” –The Separation of Blair and Bush.

Now available from Amazon, Barnes & Noble etc. and your local bookstore!

ISBN 0-9548883-5-9, 396 pages. Soft Cover.

This book is a powerful plea to the British to relinquish the governmental ties with a nation whose interests are so very different from their own. The present American administration has proved to be a dubious friend to their former allies and, by their actions, have endangered a genuinely warm and close relationship between their two peoples. The relationship of Tony Blair to George Bush is one of subservience. Now that the president’s powers and abilities have been questioned by his own electorate, the book argues that it is time to review this trans-Atlantic alliance.


Post a Comment

<< Home