Corny jokes and wide smiles mask possible problems ahead for new allies Obama and UK’s Cameron

more images

more images

Jokes, smiles _ but trouble in US-UK relationship?

LONDON — There were wide smiles, thoughtful gifts and polite — if corny — jokes.

But away from the cameras, some dark clouds hung over new British leader David Cameron’s first trip to the White House for talks with President Barack Obama.

Mounting American anger at BP, a row over the release of the Lockerbie bomber, and sharp differences on the right medicine for economic ills have chipped away at the so-called special relationship.

The two leaders appear to have forged a warmer personal relationship than the one between Obama and Cameron’s predecessor Gordon Brown. But they face a fundamental philosophical divide: Cameron embraces harsh austerity, Obama prefers aggressive stimulus.

Since his Conservative-led coalition ousted Brown’s Labour Party in May, Cameron has made a dramatic reverse in British economic policy, ushering in steep cuts to public spending in order to clear the country’s record national debt.

Obama, like his fellow center-left politician Brown, is wary of stalling fragile signs of growth — and had hoped international allies would back his plan of continuing pump priming measures as the best remedy to the financial crisis.

Amid bubbling anger at BP’s handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, Cameron also arrived in Washington mounting a defense of the oil giant — insisting the company is handling the disaster as best it can.

Cameron has been quick to stress that almost half of BP’s shareholders, and hundreds of the firm’s staff, are from the U.S. — rejecting claims that blame for the spill should fall on Britain alone.

“It’s in the interest of both our countries, as we agreed, that it remains a strong and stable company for the future,” Cameron said Tuesday in a joint news conference with Obama.

London’s outspoken mayor Boris Johnson, a member of Cameron’s Conservative Party, recently went further — accusing the U.S. of “anti-British rhetoric,” and warning that a “great British company is being continually beaten up on the international airwaves.”

Cameron, accused of fuzziness on the campaign trail, was forceful in dealing with demands from senators and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for an inquiry into accusations BP may have pressed for the release from prison of Libyan Abdel Baset al-Megrahi.

Al-Megrahi, convicted for the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am jet over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people, most of them American, was released from a Scottish jail on compassionate grounds last year after doctors assessed he had terminal cancer.

Britain has dismissed suggestions that BP, seeking access to Libya’s oil fields, leaned on lawmakers.

While Cameron said he and Obama were in “violent agreement” that the decision, taken by Scotland’s government rather than Brown’s administration, was wrong and misguided — he dismissed calls for an inquiry.

“I don’t need an inquiry to tell me what was a bad decision,” Cameron said.

Cameron’s forthrightness came as a surprise to some — especially since memories are fresh of the days former prime minister Tony Blair was dubbed George W. Bush’s “poodle.”

The New York Post said the visit had opened up a “Bam-Cam Terror Rift,” while Britain’s Daily Mirror tabloid claimed Obama had slammed Cameron over the al-Megrahi case.

Cameron’s Washington performance appeared aimed at fulfilling his promise of a “solid, but not slavish” relationship to Washington. He’s already acknowledged his focus in future will be on seeking new alliances with India and Brazil.

Many recall that the leader once drew criticism for insensitivity after choosing the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the U.S. to lambast the foreign policy of President George W. Bush.

“I think the relationship is not going to be that close,” said Andrew Gamble, head of politics and international studies at Cambridge University. “Apart from Afghanistan, the interests are more divergent than they have been for quite a long time.”

Where Margaret Thatcher backed President Ronald Reagan over his stance on the Cold War, and Blair supported Bush’s approach to Iraq and the threat from terrorism, there’s now little to bind Obama and Cameron, Gamble said.

“The U.S. is looking much more toward Asia,” while Cameron is “beginning to think about a new kind of British foreign policy,” which will prioritize trade deals with emerging economies, he said.

Matt Browne, of the Center for American Progress and a former adviser to Blair’s government, said the men share similar personal traits, but not similar policies.

“Their personal chemistry works quite well, these are two men of the same generation, who are both elite and with families in the public eye,” he said.

“But there’s a problem in that they are in ideologically opposed camps about many global issues, not least on how to deal with the global economic recovery,” Browne said.

Former Bush administration speechwriter David Frum said disputes over BP and differences over dealing with fiscal deficits will be overcome — but warned other thorny problems loom.

He says there’s may be a clash of rival financial centers London and New York as Cameron’s government simplifies regulation of the financial industry, which could prompt U.S.-based banking staff to rush to take up jobs in the U.K.

“Cameron’s instinct will be to promote a very open market in London, at a time when Obama will be adopting a more tightly regulated market,” Frum said.

Others, however, believe the two leaders’ similar approach to the Afghanistan war will keep them close, and claim differences over the economy are overstated.

“Their views are pretty similar on the war, they both have inherited this war from predecessors,” said Tim Montgomerie, founder of ConservativeHome — a grass roots Web site — and a former Conservative Party aide. “Both are taking a pragmatic and managerial attitude to managing down the level of violence.”

Cameron on Wednesday followed Obama’s lead in confirming he hoped Britain’s 10,000 troops in Afghanistan can begin to withdraw from next year. The British chief says no U.K. combat troops will remain by 2015, a national election year in Britain.

“On the economy, there are differences now, but that’s a temporary situation,” Montgomerie added.

“From New Jersey to Florida, we’re already seeing individual states are cutting back. … It’s only a matter of time before Obama will be saying that it’s now the time to cut back, perhaps within 9 to 12 months.”

Cameron’s tough tone in the U.S. may at least help boost his profile.

In New York’s Times Square on Tuesday, Britain’s Daily Mirror found few people could even identify the prime minister.

One woman confused him with “America’s Got Talent” judge Piers Morgan — and another with BP’s disgraced chief executive Tony Hayward.

Associated Press Writer Sylvia Hui in London contributed to this report