Royal Institute of International Affairs Demands U.K. Intervene in U.S. Election, Fears American Voters

Aug. 30—LaRouche was right! It's the British.

Bronwen Maddox, Director and Chief Executive of the King’s own Royal Institute of International Affairs—known as Chatham House—has sounded an alarm that American voters have a different view than its British-loving elite of what the U.S. role in the world should be, and that those voters could elect Donald Trump in 2024. Any such shift would threaten the international institutions through which the British keep their grip on power, Maddox warns. Even NATO could be defunded!

Maddox delivered the warning in her opinion column, “U.S. Allies Need To Wake Up to the Trump Question,” published by the Financial Times today. She wrote that Trump’s police mugshot when being booked in Atlanta on Aug. 25 led to his rise in the polls (and, although unsaid, a record over $4 million in campaign funds raised in the following 24 hours). This “should prompt a foreign policy rethink for the U.K. and its allies.”

Her piece echoes the warning issued in the December 2018 report from the House of Lords Select Committee on International Relations, “U.K. Foreign Policy in a Shifting World Order,” that should Trump be elected to a second term, the U.K. could no longer rely on the so-called “Special Relationship” with the United States which has been the bedrock of its post-World War II policy. (The same report also proposed means for the U.K. to contain or control Russia, China and India.)

Writes Maddox:

“British foreign policy, like that in much of Europe and many democracies beyond, is based on the presumption that the U.S. in some sense always remains the same. Its presidents, its policies, its wars of choice come and go. But America upholds the principle of international institutions even if it rails against some of them or funds them sporadically. It continues to pick up the giant’s share of the tab for NATO, above all.

“Those assumptions are confounded if Donald Trump is elected again.”

Sure, the U.K. has disputes with President Biden, too, but:

“Dealing with Trump in the White House again would present problems on a different scale. In a second term … [h]e would have an utterly different conception of America’s role in the world and the nature of its democracy at home, of the rule of law at home and abroad.” She then named what the British Monarchy and City of London financiers most fear: “And so would the U.S. voters who elected him.”

The result: “At that point, the U.S. becomes, for its allies, a different country altogether. The implications for global institutions, for international law and order, for predictability of a world superpower are stark. That they are barely discussed in published foreign policy is perhaps because of concern about jeopardizing current relationships. But the prospect of the U.S. being led by a president who denies the principles of American democracy is likely enough that this is no longer a good excuse.”