"Love actually is all around," declares Hugh Grant in the new British romantic comedy "Love Actually."
That is, unless the relationship in question is between George W. Bush and the rest of the world.
In the movie, Hugh Grant, playing the part of British prime minister, is visited by the American president, played by Billy Bob Thornton. The exchange between the two of them neatly explains what many Brits probably think of Dubya.
The American president is absolutely uncooperative to any British requests during a diplomatic exchange, and later says smugly to the prime minister, "I'll give you anything you ask for - as long as it's something I want to give."
Soon after, he offends the prime minister by pursuing one of the British aides, Grant's love interest.
In a following news conference, the president is asked how the trip is going, and he responds mockingly, "I think we got what we came here to get. Our relationship is a very special relationship, and it will continue to remain special in the future."
At this point, the prime minister has had it, and when asked about this special relationship, he responds, "I fear this has become a bad relationship - a relationship based on the president taking exactly what he wants and casually ignoring all the things that really matter to Britain ... And a friend who bullies us is no longer a friend."
For the rest of the movie, Brits everywhere cheer their prime minister for standing up to the awful American leader.
Billy Bob Thornton's portrayal of the American president clearly is a hyperbole, but what is troubling is that back in reality, it's probably not far from the truth about how foreigners actually feel about our president these days.
The 'Toxic Texan'
Coincidentally, Bush is on the first state visit by an American president to Britain since 1918 this week. But while Tony Blair is being a bit more accommodating than Hugh Grant's prime minister, the British public is not.
Headlines in the British press range from "So who did invite him?" in The Guardian to "What's so special about this special relationship?" in The Irish Times.
And mass protests by the British people have accompanied Bush wherever he goes. Many critics have argued this visit is merely a chance for a good photo opportunity with the royalty to boost Bush's ratings at home. Meanwhile, Tony Blair is suffering politically by being seen with the "toxic Texan," as the British media have started to call our president.
However, this contempt for Bush is not just limited to Britain. Throughout Europe and the rest of the world, there is widespread opposition to American policies. By some accounts, Bush is the most disliked president ever abroad.
The reasons for so much antipathy toward America are complex, sometimes bordering on envy and fear. But the people also do have legitimate gripes.
The fact is, the United States is clearly the most dominant force in the world today, both militarily and economically, which is great. We are all benefiting from this supremacy by living here and attending a public university, so to criticize the hegemony of the United States would be hypocritical. But like we learned from Spiderman, with great power comes great responsibility, and our Bush isn't exactly fulfilling his global responsibilities.
In a short three years, the Bush administration has managed to alienate allies around the world with its self-important attitude.
Bush has discarded a treaty that a previous U.S. administration signed - the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. He reneged against campaign pledges to regulate carbon dioxide from power plants, and instead opposed the Kyoto Protocol, the international climate treaty the United States signed in 1997.
Bush's cowboy-ish, go-it-alone attitude sometimes inspires admiration from his supporters. On the other hand, there are those like myself who wonder how long we'll be able to alienate others and rely merely on the strength of our force.
Alienating our neighbors
Conservatives appeal to American individualism to justify their unilateral decision-making, but I've never understood this uniqueness about America to mean that we ignore our allies. I simply cannot see what is admirable about the arrogance that is a part of this cowboy mentality.
Having to be an individual does not preclude trying to work out conflicts with other people. It's a basic human tenet that it is better to work together with others instead of trying to bully them. No one likes bullies, and I fail to understand how being a bully somehow becomes cool when it involves international diplomacy.
It's easy in the face of all this antagonism to want to dislike them back. In fact, Franco- phobia overtook this nation during the weeks leading up to the war, as if all French people were somehow naturally at odds with all Americans.
George Monbiot, a British author of the new book "The Age of Consent," wrote last week in the Evening Standard: "Our protests are against the policies, not the people."
Rejecting critics who shout "anti-American," Monbiot points out that "perhaps the gravest of the charges we can lay against George Bush is that he is himself an anti-American. His style of government stands at odds with everything we were led to believe the United States of America represents."
As Monbiot sees it, Bush has lied to the American public multiple times to justify the war in Iraq, waged war on civil liberties at home and is creating an imperialist project in the Middle East.
Monbiot is exaggerating about the third claim, but he is right on mark with his first two criticisms. Maybe the American people could learn from our cousins across the pond and stand up for the truth and our rights.
International diplomacy is one of those tricky skills that set apart the great presidents from the not-so great ones. In this department, there is no love, actually, for Bush.
Ishtiaque Masud is an economics junior. Reach him at ishtiaque.masud@asu.edu.
