Size and reputation - why the usa has valued its ‘special relationships’ with denmark and the uk differently since 9/11

被引:0
作者
Jakobsen P.V. [1 ]
Ringsmose J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Department of Strategy, The Royal Danish Defence Academy, Copenhagen
[2] Center for War Studies, University of Southern Denmark, Odense
关键词
Afghanistan; Denmark; Iraq; Special relationship; UK;
D O I
10.1080/14794012.2015.1022370
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Denmark appears far more successful in managing its ‘special’ relationship with the USA than the UK since 9/11. By doing exactly the same as the UK, but on a much smaller scale and at much lower cost in terms of blood, treasure and domestic controversy, Denmark has succeeded in generating more American public gratitude than the UK. While London has been accused of losing Basra and Musa Qaleh, Copenhagen has been showered with praise and top-posts in NATO. This article explains why demonstrating how the differences in size and reputation gave rise to different expectations of the special relationship both in Washington and at home. Britain disappointed Washington by failing to make a difference in stabilising Afghanistan and Iraq, whereas Denmark by merely engaging in combat and taking casualties far exceeded Washington’s expectations. Likewise, the failure to significantly influence decision-making in Washington was a source of great frustration in London but a non-issue in Copenhagen, which never expected it in the first place. © 2015 Board of Transatlantic Studies.
引用
收藏
页码:135 / 153
页数:18
相关论文
共 101 条
  • [1] Off-The-Record Interview with British Member of the Delegation
  • [2] The Crucial Importance of Expectations Management is also Emphasised in Alan Dobson and Steve Marsh, 58, 2, pp. 266-281, (2014)
  • [3] Steve Marsh, ‘Global Security: US-UK Relations: Lessons for the Special Relationship?’, Journal of Transatlantic Studies, 10, 2, pp. 182-199, (2012)
  • [4] Elie Jerome, ‘Many Times Doomed but Still Alive: An Attempt to Understand the Continuity of the Special Relationship’, Journal of Transatlantic Studies 3, No. 3 (2005)Patrick Porter, 86, 2, (2010)
  • [5] ‘Introduction’, Anglo-American Relations, pp. 1-26, (2013)
  • [6] Kimball W.F., ‘The “Special” Anglo-American Special Relationship: “A Fatter, Larger Underwater Cable”’, Journal of Transatlantic Studies, 3, 3, (2005)
  • [7] 66
  • [8] UK-US Relations, pp. 82-83, (2010)
  • [9] ‘The U.S.-UK Special Relationship in Historical Context, Lessons of the Past’, (2006)
  • [10] Billiere P.D., Command S.