British Prime Minister Gordon Brown came to Washington this
week, a visit anticipated with much curiosity on this side of the
Atlantic - and surely on the other as well. As difficult as it must
have been to follow his predecessor - Tony Blair with whom
President Bush had a close personal relationship - Mr. Brown pulled
off a sterling performance. His statements on Iraq and Afghanistan
were steady, supportive and measured, and he indicated a deep
commitment to the "special relationship" between the United States
and Britain.
This approach must have been deeply welcome and reassuring to the
rather embattled American president, whose recent months have been
characterized by setbacks at home on immigration and whose policies
abroad in the Middle East are the constant targets of attack, even
when they work. Mr. Brown's outstretched hand certainly proves that
at the British-government level, there is still an appreciation
that the relationship with the United States is of fundamental
importance for British foreign policy.
It is no secret that the close British alliance with the United
States in the war on terror has been immensely controversial in
Britain. In the view of many, Mr. Blair sacrificed other priorities
of his prime ministership in order to show support for the United
States after September 11. It has therefore been a matter of
intense speculation whether his chosen successor, the former
chancellor of the exchequer, would deviate from the course he had
set. Meanwhile, the British Tories under the new leadership of
David Cameron have taken pains to create a certain distance from
the Bush White House, something that has not gone unnoticed here in
Washington.
In addition, Mr. Brown was quite a blank slate as far as foreign
policy goes, with few public statements to indicate where he stood.
Furthermore, his appointment of former U.N. official and famous
America-basher Mark Malloch Brown to a high position in the British
Foreign Office also left many wondering about Mr. Brown's own
inclinations. The indications from Mr. Brown's first weeks in
office, however, during which a massive bombing plot was unveiled
in Scotland, were that this is not someone inclined to be soft on
terrorists.
In style, Mr. Brown is very different from Mr. Blair. During the
Camp David press conference with Mr. Bush, he avoided the chummy
banter and jostling that used to characterize the Tony Blair-George
Bush press conferences. Furthermore, Mr. Brown stayed away from the
personal endorsements that Mr. Bush is so fond of, the mark of
someone who sees world leadership in highly personal terms.
Instead Mr. Brown focused on the tasks at hand, winning the war
against terrorism, and on the foundation of the trans-Atlantic
relationship. On both counts he could not have been more
encouraging. For example, he said: "In Iraq, we have duties to
discharge and responsibilities to keep, in support of the
democratically elected government, and in support of the explicit
will of the international community... So we are at one in fighting
the battle against terrorism, and that struggle is one that we will
fight with determination and with resilience and right across the
world... We are in a generation-long battle against terrorism,
against al Qaeda-inspired terrorism, and this is a battle for which
we can give no quarter," Mr. Brown said.
On the "relationship between the Britain and the United States,"
he said "Call it the 'special relationship'; call it, as Churchill
did, the 'join inheritance'; call it when we meet as a form of
homecoming, as President Reagan did, "The strength of this
relationship... is not just built on shared problems that we have
to deal with together or on the shared history, but is built... on
shared values." No wonder Mr. Bush commented that "He gets
it."
Now, it is also the case that Mr. Brown chose to couch his views
in terms of an independent British foreign policy rather than as a
subsidiary of American interests. And why wouldn't he? He is after
all, Britain's prime minister, and his words will be scrutinized at
home.
British papers noted approvingly that he stressed that British
military estimates would determined when Britain draws down its
final 5,500 troops from the Basra area of Iraq. And he avoided
using the term "war on terror," calling terrorism instead a "crime
against humanity." Rather than getting fixated on the word "war,"
let us be grateful that Mr. Brown's visit to Washington was right
on the mark in substance.
Helle Dale is director of the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation.
First appeared in the Washington Times