Main Question or Discussion Point
Last one for the night. Here is a clear example of a government saying one thing, with the intention of secretly doing the exact opposite. Very troublesome when the Prime Minister of a nation can be overruled by subordinates.
Wikileaks is not as US-centric as we are being led to believe.The Guardian said:Two senior Whitehall officials assured US diplomats that the renewal of Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent would go ahead, apparently contradicting then prime minister Gordon Brown's public statements proposing some disarmament by the UK, according to leaked US embassy cables.
The London embassy sent a secret cable back to Washington last autumn reporting conversations with the two civil servants, Richard Freer and Judith Gough, in which they cast doubt on the significance of Brown's announcement at the UN general assembly that Britain might cut the number of planned new Trident submarines from four to three.
It is not clear from the cables whether or not the Britons were speaking to the Americans on Brown's authority. In the dispatches, US embassy officials describe them as "HMG [Her Majesty's Government] sources" and mark that their identities should be protected.
According to the leaked cables, US anxiety about the future of Britain's Trident missiles followed Brown's speech at the UN in September 2009 on global nuclear disarmament.
In London, Freer and Gough told the Americans that Brown's words came as a surprise to them because there was no actual change of British nuclear policy under way. There would continue to be "no daylight" between the US and the UK on the existing £20bn Trident replacement scheme, the Americans were assured.