Obama to Stress Afghanistan as Cameron Looks to Protect BP

President Barack Obama will stress U.S. resolve in Afghanistan and what needs to be done there when he meets today with U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, as both leaders face growing domestic skepticism about the war.

Cameron has concerns of his own as he makes his first visit to the White House as British leader. Chief among them is quieting criticism of London-based BP Plc. He brings a message that BP, Europe’s second-largest energy company by market value, needs to survive to fulfill its promise to compensate U.S. victims of oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

While the two leaders also will discuss the global economy, the Middle East peace process and Iran, “Afghanistan is probably first and foremost on our list” of topics, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said yesterday.

“The president has, on a number of occasions, laid out why what he’s doing in Afghanistan is in our national security interests,” he said. “We will continue to make that case.”

The U.K. is the second-largest contributor to the NATO-led force in Afghanistan after the U.S. Cameron has said he would like all British troops to leave Afghanistan before the next general election, scheduled for 2015. Obama has vowed to start drawing down U.S. forces in July 2011 and turning over more security responsibility to the Afghans, depending on conditions.

Donor Conference

As the two leaders meet, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.K. Foreign Secretary William Hague are in Kabul at an international conference of donors working to stabilize and rebuild Afghanistan.

Obama’s focus is “taking stock of where we are, what needs to be done and how best to accomplish that,” said White House National Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer.

Obama and Cameron also will talk about Pakistan and “the efforts to support Pakistan as it takes on the terrorists along the Afghanistan border,” Hammer said.

Support for the war is waning in both Britain and the U.S. Almost 6 in 10 respondents in a Bloomberg National Poll conducted July 9-12 said Afghanistan is a lost cause. A YouGov Plc poll last month found 25 percent of adults in Britain want all troops to be withdrawn immediately, with another 42 percent saying most soldiers should be pulled out soon and the rest within the next year or so.

BP has become a point of friction between the two nations since the April 20 blowout of company well in the gulf killed 11 rig workers and caused the biggest oil spill in U.S. history.

BP’s Importance

Cameron, who met BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg July 16, indicated he’ll emphasize that the company must remain viable. “Of course BP has got to do everything necessary to cap the oil well, to clean up the spill, to pay compensation,” the prime minister told National Public Radio in Washington this morning. “I have met with BP and I know they want to do that and will do that.”

The company has lost 40 percent of its value since the leak began. It has suspended dividend payments and agreed to put $20 billion into an independently administered fund to pay economic damage claims related to the spill.

Adding to that, a group of U.S. senators is questioning whether there were links between BP’s interests in drilling for oil in Libya and the 2009 release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi. Gibbs said “this issue will come up” in the meeting with Cameron.

Al-Megrahi was freed by Scotland, which has an independent justice system, on compassionate grounds in August because he was dying of cancer. He remains alive. The Libyan was jailed in 2001 for the 1988 killing of 270 people in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over the Scottish town of Lockerbie.

Cameron, who opposed the release at the time, told NPR he thought al-Megrahi “should have died in jail.”

No Evidence

Hague wrote Clinton on July 17, saying there was no evidence BP was involved in the release. The previous day, Ambassador to the U.S. Nigel Sheinwald wrote to Senator John Kerry, whose Foreign Relations Committee is holding a hearing on the matter, saying “inaccuracies” about the Lockerbie bomber were “harmful to the U.K.”

The U.S. is pressing Scottish and British officials to again review the circumstances of al-Megrahi’s release to ensure it “did not represent any inappropriate action by any government or entity to skew the results,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said yesterday.

In an effort to defuse the issue, Cameron late yesterday offered to meet the senators from New York and New Jersey who have been pressing the issue, Robert Menendez, Charles Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand and Frank Lautenberg, all Democrats. “We plan to ask him to have the U.K. do a complete investigation and bring al-Megrahi back to justice,” Schumer said in a statement today accepting the invitation.

Scottish Decision

Cameron, while offering sympathy to the families of victims of the bombing, today fought back against the linking of BP and Al-Megrahi. “Let’s be clear about who released al-Megrahi,” he told NPR. “It was not the decision of BP, it was the decision of Scottish ministers.”

Cameron wrote in the Wall Street Journal today that he wants to move beyond the “Kremlinology” that dogged some of his predecessors’ relations with U.S. leaders.

“I understand that we are the junior partner, just as we were in the 1940s and, indeed, in the 1980s,” Cameron wrote. “But we are a strong, self-confident country clear in our views and values, and we should behave that way.”

Cameron, who also is scheduled to meet later this week with U.S. business leaders in New York, also will be focusing on trade.

“It’s the real stimulus our economies need, and Britain is open for business -- especially to the U.S., where our close ties already deliver jobs and prosperity for both our peoples,” he wrote.

To contact the reporters on this story: Catherine Dodge in Washington at cdodge1@bloomberg.net; Robert Hutton in Washington at rhutton1@bloomberg.net

Press spacebar to pause and continue. Press esc to stop.

Bloomberg reserves the right to remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.