Afternoon:
14°c
For Americans who like to think of Scotland as the home of Braveheart and mellow-voiced golf commentators, the decision to release Abdelbaset al-Megrahi has come as a shock.
Could these hairy-legged, whisky-sipping hard men of the Highlands really be surrender monkeys in disguise?
For all their haggis-eating and Sean Connery myths, is it possible that when it comes to standing up to terrorists the Scots are no better than the French?
As a Brit living in the US, the case has provided the first, and I hope last, opportunity to raise the subject of devolution.
The Scots, I point out, demanded and received their own government. It's complicated, but they're not the English.
They have their own view of when it's compassionate to release a man convicted of murdering 270 people aboard a jumbo jet.
Had al-Megrahi been tried in England, I assure the sceptics, he would have ended his days moaning in agony in the damp bowels of some medieval dungeon. Or perhaps been dispatched to some CIA detention facility in Poland or Egypt.
I was living in Paris when America turned on the French for being "cheese-eating surrender monkeys".
Because they opposed the invasion of Iraq, an entire nation was written off as fops and terrorist sympathisers.
If all you listened to was American talk radio, you would have expected to find Osama bin Laden with a regular table at the Café de Flore and flocks of devotees lined up along the Boulevard Saint-Germain.
French exporters bore the brunt of the propaganda war. Wine and cheese sales to America collapsed. Diners in New York restaurants avoided the French section of the wine list.
Fortunately, the kinds of Americans who succumbed to "surrender monkey" hysteria were not those who went on bicycle tours of the Loire or rented villas in the Luberon.
But enough rejected French products to cause real pain to portions of the French economy.
It would be ludicrous if the same fate befell Scotland's export and tourism industry as a consequence of al-Megrahi's release.
But the boycott websites are starting up and the language of contempt sounds worryingly familiar.
And if it turns out al-Megrahi's release was stage-managed from Number 10 in return for some oil deal, how long will it be before the anti-Scottish sentiment turns anti-British?
Before the animal rights protesters who already stalk Anna Wintour, Vogue's fur-wearing British editor, are joined by anti-British radicals?
Before Tina Brown, Simon Schama and Hugh Dancy have to scurry through Manhattan in fear?
After the British were thought heroic for so long for standing by America in its post 9/11 hour of need, it will be a jolt to be dumped. But then, even the French have come back into favour.
Their objections to the invasion of Iraq have many more admirers today than they had back in 2003.
When the choice came down to being friends with Donald Rumsfeld or drinking French wine and eating French food, Americans eventually voted with their taste buds.
Perhaps one day al-Megrahi's release will be seen as an example of an enlightened British legal system or even foreign policy.
The British are often torn, politically, culturally and spiritually, between their allegiance to the United States and to Europe. Ideally, one shouldn't have to take sides.
But I remember a French politician expressing his horror at America's reaction to French opposition to the war.
It was so personal and vicious. "We Europeans are lovers, not haters," he told me. Put like that, it's not hard to choose.
Reader views (6)
"Perhaps one day al-Megrahi's release will be seen as an example of an enlightened British legal system"
What?
We don't have a BRITISH Legal System!
He was released under the SCOTTISH Legal System.
The legal system in ENGLAND and WALES is separate from the SCOTTISH Legal System!
ENGLISH LAW is different to SCOTTISH LAW!
England and Scotland are separate countries!
- Derek, Southampton,England
Harry,
the UK, Russia, France, and China all gave more weapons to Sadam Hussein than the US. And I do enjoy how easy it is to skate around your own country's involvement in such sticky issues. Much easier to create a simplified "US is the source of all problems" answer. Most of the problems pertaining to Africa and the Middle East stem from European Colonialism. Not to mention how many native peoples were wiped out by invading European armies.
- Thom, San Antonio
I do want to appologize to the Scots and to the British, as a whole, for the behavior of some Americans. I could try to go into why some Americans do this, but, this site isn't long enough. Let's just leave it as some people on this side of the pond will bash anything that is outside of its' borders (amazingly this sometimes includes Hawaii). Generally it is a lack of knowledge in geography and history, but in this case, it is a case of simple hate for anyone who ever commited a crime (or accused thereof) against an American.
Scotland did the right thing, they were only guilty of being betraid by the Government of Lybia.
As an aside, I sure wish that I would find less French bashing on British blogs. I know it has to do with how you are raised, but, they are one of your, and our, key allies. It is alright to critize an individuals' or a Governmental position, but not a whole nation or its' people.
Good day!
- Fred Orth, Tulsa,OK,USA
so after surrendering hundreds of our young people to an american war no one here believes in we are now to be branded 'surrender monkeys' for the compassionate release of one man most people here don't even believe guilty ? well with a 'special relationship' like that it's not hard to tell which partner is being screwed.
- Squiz, Islington
Unfortunately the American way of going about things. Such as shooting down an Iranian Airliner, going about its normal business on a scheduled flight. An act, for which there has never been an official apology. Compounded by the fact that serviceman involved were honoured on their return to the States. Is it any wonder that a large part of the world is full of hatred for America?
In my book The surrender monkeys from the Iraqi war, were in fact Tony Blair and his obedient cabinet. as they participated in the fraud commonly known as the threat of WMD in order to appease America and go to war with Iraq.
Interestingly then as with the Lockerbie bombing, the USA did have a blind spot for the real threat, Iran. Even so, I do not advocate the bombing of Iranian citizens because they are just as much victims as those poor without healthcare in the US.
It is no good labelling Libya as a supporter of terrorism because they helped to arm the IRA because as I recall the US have armed and supported Saddam Hussein against Iraq and the Taliban against Russia in Afghanistan. Not forgetting the hundreds of billions of dollars, in military support for Israel. It does not take a genius to work out that there is no truer a saying than "You reap what you sow".
One would hope that Obama is successful in changing the way that America thinks. Otherwise the obvious conclusion that the rest of the world should draw is that America continues to be a threat to world peace.
- Harry H, London UK
As you have ignored the facts that both Republican and Democrat Senators were at the fore-front of fund raising for the IRA and the US Supreme Court regularly stopped IRA murderers from being deported to the UK because they (and this is really funny in the light of Gitmo) they wouldn't receive a fair trial you might have a point!
- Mark, South-East London
