1

US and UK has had what some call a "special relation" for decades. Just a glimpse of recent declarations about this subject (Wikipedia):

In 2015, Cameron stated the US President calls him "bro" and described the "special relationship" between Washington and Westminster as "stronger than it has ever been".[178] In March 2016, the US President criticised the British PM for becoming "distracted" over the intervention in Libya, a criticism that was also aimed at the French President.[179] A National Security Council spokesman sent an unsolicited email to the BBC limiting the damage done by stating that "Prime Minister David Cameron has been as close a partner as the president has had."

However, there has been some tension building up lately between the two countries. Classified police photos from the scene of the terrorist attack in Manchester, England, leaking to The New York Times is one example:

British security officials reacted with fury to the leaks, with one telling the Financial Times that lives were being put at risk. The BBC also reported on Thursday morning that the police in Manchester had stopped sharing information about the investigation with the US because of the ongoing leaks.

Following the terrorist attacks in London at the beginning of June, Donald Trump made a remark that many would see as unfit:

President Trump has launched a scathing attack on Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, over his reaction to the attacks in Borough Market and on London Bridge.

It is clear that one has reasons to be alarmed after a terrorist attack had place in his/her city, but this remark is not exactly nice after such an event.

Question: Why does Donald Trump seem to help raising of the tension between US and UK ?

  • 4
    Do you have any reputable source linking the leaks about the terror attacks to Donald Trump? It seems that such example is not very relevant to the question. – SJuan76 Jun 5 '17 at 11:35
  • @SJuan76 - The example is to illustrate the tension between US and UK and it was not my intention to link it to Donald Trump. However, it was introduced to justify the "tension", not to blame Donald Trump. – Alexei Jun 5 '17 at 11:47
  • 2
    Just saying that donald trump is battling leaks of classified information from his own cabinet, and indeed he said he would go after the manchester leakers post haste ... so we can't really hold him responsible for this. – SleepingGod Jun 5 '17 at 13:06
  • 2
    Can you clarify the wording of the question, as it's not clear (at least to me) what you're asking. Are you asking why Trump is doing what he's doing? – Steve Melnikoff Jun 5 '17 at 13:17
  • 2
    Is this a phenomenon actually exclusive or specific to the UK? Seems like POTUS Trump gets accused of that for almost everyone. – PoloHoleSet Jun 5 '17 at 16:24
18

Because Donald Trump is Donald Trump, meaning he's impulsive and at times abrasive. Furthermore he doesn't seem very taken with the idea of moderating his tone or content.

Let's not over-analyse Trump; much of what he does doesn't have some deeper meaning; it's simply because his personality is what it is.

The President Is This Presidency’s Worst Enemy:

Trump’s off-the-cuff claim that President Obama “wiretapped” him ate up a third of his first 100 days and hurt his standing with allies and voters alike. If you believe that this was some brilliant 4-D chess gambit hatched at Mar-a-Lago, you must believe that plummeting to 35 percent approval was part of the plan, too.

We overanalyze Trump. He is what he appears to be:

We badly want to understand Trump, to grasp him. It might give us some sense of control, or at least an ability to predict what he will do next.

But what if there’s nothing to understand? What if there’s no there there? What if our attempts to explain Trump have failed not because we haven’t hit on the right one, but because we are, theory-of-mind-wise, overinterpreting the text?

In short, what if Trump is exactly as he appears: a hopeless narcissist with the attention span of a fruit fly, unable to maintain consistent beliefs or commitments from moment to moment, acting on base instinct, entirely situationally, to bolster his terrifyingly fragile ego.

3

TL;DR: This question seems to consist of two unrelated parts, Manchester attack leaks and an attack on London Mayor's stance.

  • The former has absolutely nothing to do with Trump's actions/intentions in the first place.

  • The latter has nothing to do with US/UK relations and is directed at specific politician in exact way Trump attacked US politicians before.


  1. Manchester attack leaks.

    This has absolutely nothing to do with Trump, and (while obviously there's no proof as we don't know who the leaker is) the pattern is lately that most national security leaks were from people/forces opposed to Trump.

    So, even if you can blame Trump for that event on the general principle of "The Buck Stops Here", you can't possibly ask "why does Trump do it" as it was done in contradiction of Trump (or likely irrespective of him).

    Here's one expert opinion from "The Daily Signal":

    The leak on Britain likely began with a Trump-related leaker, said Steven Bucci, a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation, who is a former Pentagon official and former Army Special Forces officer.

    “Once you begin the process of feeling it’s cool to be a reporter’s inside source, then it takes a life of its own,” Bucci told The Daily Signal. “I would bet a month’s pay that a person who had leaked about Trump also leaked this information.”

    A "Station Chief" podcast discussed these national security leaks pretty extensively last couple of months, with the expert opinion (one of the hosts is a retired CIA station chief) being that there's an endemic problem with leaks at US national security apparatus, wholly independent of Trump, persistent and unlikely to go away - including according to statements from top US national security officials.


  1. Trump's attacks on mayor of London.

    This has nothing to do with desire to raise tensions with UK. It's raising tensions with left wing politician that does something which Trump - and the ideology which got him elected - strongly oppose (namely, their worldview includes an assertion that the western elite deliberately downplay the threat of radical Islamic terrorism). If you recall, Trump attacked Barack Obama over the same topic, who happens to NOT be a Mayor of London; so this is all about Trump's ideological views and has absolutely nothing to do with some imputed non-existing "intention" to raise the tension between US and UK.

  • 2
    "the pattern is lately that most national security leaks were from people/forces opposed to Trump." - except ones that come directly from Trump's mouth, which encompasses a large number of the leaks that have been reported on. – PoloHoleSet Jun 5 '17 at 16:28
  • 4
    @user4012 - sorry, but they were leaked to foreigners who had no reason to access that information, and who actually would/should be specifically excluded from knowing those things. How is that "better" than it getting leaked to the public? For anyone but POTUS, that would be a violation of the Espionage Act. Now, if there was some kind of smart, strategic reason for it, that would be one thing. In the context that he's doing his reflexive bragging about how awesome everything he has or does is, it's inexcusable. Or, would be considered inexcusable, except by those who reflexively excuse. – PoloHoleSet Jun 5 '17 at 16:48
  • 4
    You seem to be forgetting this was an issue as soon as he started getting briefings as a candidate. – PoloHoleSet Jun 5 '17 at 16:51
  • 1
    @AlexanderO'Mara - the question already had a bad subjective answer. I tried to give a more objective one – user4012 Jun 5 '17 at 18:48
  • 5
    You might need to try harder. I mean really, the "fact" the so-called "western elite" is "deliberately downplaying the threat of radical Islamic terrorism"? What nonsense is this? If that's the case, I assert Trump is deliberately downplaying the threat of toddlers with guns, or perhaps more appropriately, native right wing terrorists. Not freaking out over ISIS is mostly about not giving ISIS what they want. – Alexander O'Mara Jun 5 '17 at 19:06

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .