I read before about the personal way with which Bush treats world leaders he meets with. Very unprofessional I thought, a kind of psychological alienation in which some might fell, lured by the power confered to the man by his country's position as the world's first leader. It seems that Blair fell for that 'charm'. I heard also that Bush is unconfortable with people he feels he cannot approach this way and prefers not to meet or to meet briefly with them. Now the Bush kindness net is thrown on Angela Merkel and if you read the interview with Spiegel you feel sorry for Angela, reagrded as the poor little girl from former GDR with a pastor father living under the horrible communist regime. A narrative is set for Angela at the white house and she has to fit in.
I mean that is terrible, I wouldn't even consider doing regular business dealings with people like Bush or having my hair dresser treating me like this, invading my private sphere in order to exploit the business relation to their advantage ! And when you think that most world leaders fond of Bush have already enjoyed this scheme you might ask very well if the Bush interview should not be part of the criteria we set for choosing our leaders for their ability to have a certain independance of mind and to separate the personal from the professional which is an integral part of any work ethics !
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Since March 29th 2006
2 comments:
Regards Blair and Bush. Blair had made up his mind immediately after 9/11 to "stand shoulder to shoulder" with the American cousins "in their hour of need". Blair firmly believes that Islamic extremism and terrorism are designed to threaten "our way of life", he has repeatedly stated this (he's also stated that he "would do it all again"). And at the time Blair was domestically pushed out of the way by Brown. So, Mr Blair went to America and easily rekindled the "special relationship", meeting with standing ovations for his "Top Gun" style speeches. For Americans, they're the dream combo: the populist and simple President alongside the smooth operating Old World "Wisdom" Prime Minister.
Of course, in real terms, the UK is nothing but the US's lapdog, relegated to a few relatively minor tasks. In Iraq, US military might didn't need any partners: these were only required to give the whole thing an air of respectability, after the UN fiasco.
I think if Bush is having easily his way it is because the submissive attitude towards him of world leaders like Blair and lately Jacques Chirac.
Post a Comment