Britian and International Relations Flashcards
(20 cards)
Who could Britain align with?
-Commonwealth
-USA
-Europe
What were the positives of the commonwealth?
-World influence
-Opportunities
-Trade
What were the negatives of the commonwealth?
-Anti-British resentment in ex-colonial nations
-Costs
-Chance countries want independence
-Political issues with trying to appease
What were the positives of allying with the USA?
-USA is a powerful nation (world superpower)
-Shared values (e.g: capitalism)
What were the negatives of allying with the USA?
-Far from the UK
-US is more focused on its own development
-Dragged into Cold War conflicts
-Creates tension with other alliances
-Only junior partners with US
What were the positives of allying with Europe?
-Better relations that with the US (less conflict)
-Close neighbours
-Improvement for Britain
What were the negatives of allying with Europe?
-Tensions with some European nations (E.g De Gaulle)
-Many different values, goals and traditions
Which did it take so long for Britain to join the EEC?
-Lack of influence
-Constantly denied by De Gaulle due to suspicions
-Europe felt that Britain and France handled the Suez Crisis badly
-Issues with the ERM
What happened on Black Wednesday?
-Britain was forced to withdraw from the ERM due to its exchange rate being below the limit to join
-This lead to Britain losing lots of good reputation
What is evidence of Britain’s relationship with Europe failing?
-Issues with EEC
-Issues with ERM
-Black Wednesday
What is evidence of Britain’s relationship with Europe succeeding?
-A referendum showed that 2:1 of Britain wanted to be in the EEC
-Consensus to avoid conflict which leads to the UN and NATO
-Similar ideologies (e.g democracy, no communism)
Why did Britain decolonise?
-Impact of WW2
-Economic weakness
-Impact of Cold War
What were Britain’s aims while decolonising?
-Maintain strong relations with decolonised territories
-Leave behind strong and fair systems
-Avoid humiliation
In what ways did Britain respond well to the 1950-53 Korean War?
-Swift response shows Britain’s role as a key member
-Sent in powerful military forces despite weaknesses post WW2
-Co-ordination with the US strengthened relations against communism
-Still managed to commit into other conflicts such as the Gulf War
In what ways did Britain not respond well to the 1950-53 Korean War?
-Despite providing powerful forces, theirs were still much weaker than the forces provided by the US
-Economic strain of Britain’s already weak post war economy
-Showed that Britain was dependent on the US
-Little support from public
-Colonial complications weakened Britain’s moral authority
In what ways did Britain respond well to the 1956 Suez Crisis?
-Efficient military operation carried out which showcased their strong tactical abilities
-Initially good co-ordination
-Rapidly pushes out ceasefire once it was needed
-Managed to maintain order in the UN and at home
In what ways did Britain not respond well to the 1956 Suez Crisis?
-Severely undermined Britain’s credibility by secret conspiring with France and Israel (EW!)
-Assumed the US would give support (WRONG.)
-Strengthened arab nationalism rather than weakening it
-Failure to achieve goal
In what ways did Britain respond well to the 1982 Falklands War?
-Margaret Thatcher responded militaryily to Argentina’s invasion, which showed a strong stance to keep British sovereignty
-Britain’s navy force showed a remarkable demonstration of military planning and execution
-Successfully prevented the invasion and enhanced the Islands defences
In what ways did Britain respond well to the First Gulf War?
-Instant response from John Major signalled solidarity with international law
-Deployed 45,000 troops, being the second-largest contributor to the US armies
-Performed well during the 100 hour war
-Closely co-ordinated with allies
-Adhered to international law, giving them moral authority in later conflicts
In what ways did Britain not respond well to the First Gulf War?
-Lack of post-war vision led to instability in Iraq
-Had to deal with the humanitarian consquences of the war
-Overrelied on US leadership
-Tight media coverage muddled public opinion of the war
