Alexandros Petersen
2007-05-24 07:00:00.0
Current rank: Not ranked

WASHINGTON -

Tony Blair finally did it. On May 10, Britain’s longest-serving prime minister from the Labour Party formally announced his resignation. The next day he endorsed the candidacy of Gordon Brown, the current chancellor of the Exchequer and long understood heir to the post. The smooth-talking, ever-smiling Blair will officially be replaced by the dour and awkward Brown in late June.

In light of Blair’s last official visit to the White House on May 17, the changeover has led many to predict a souring of U.S.- U.K. relations. The Labour Party’s sagging poll numbers became tangibly evident in local government elections May 3. To reverse this trend, Brown is expected to back away from Blair’s staunch support of Bush administration policy on Iraq, Iran and the war on terrorism.

To eat into opposition Conservative Party support, whose leader David Cameron said Sept. 11 that the U.K. should not be “slavish” to the U.S., Brown may even make some seemingly anti-American statements, in comparison with Blair’s usual tone.

To some extent, this is understandable. Having been in power for 10 years (May 1 was the anniversary), the threat to Labour’s hold on the reins is more real than it is for Republicans in the U.S. Murmurs are growing that to secure legitimacy, Brown should call a general election shortly after he gets the keys to 10 Downing St. This perceived legitimacy deficit is largely due to Labour’s close association with unpopular U.S. foreign policy.

But, while Brown will do what he has to stave off the competition, his worldview and policies are not anti-American. Of course, speculating on a Brown foreign policy is a bit like guessing how Ben Bernanke would do in Condoleezza Rice’s job.

But, as chancellor, he has been known to admire the lenient bankruptcy laws, low capital gains taxes and entrepreneur-encouraging aspects of the U.S. economic system. Brown frequently vacations in the U.S., and those across the pond who know him well say he has a real affection for America and believes wholeheartedly in maintaining the powerful intangible strings of the Special Relationship.

At the 2006 Labour party conference, Brown argued that “the renewal of New Labour will be founded on … the need for global cooperation in the fight against terrorism, never anti-Americanism, recognizing that the values of decent people everywhere are for liberty, democracy and justice.”

This statement could not only have been in support of his prime minister. Both Blair and Brown are interventionists, but Brown prefers aid and the encouragement of free markets to military missions. Expect to hear more about Africa and less about Iraq from Brown.

Even though, during the Blair years, Brown was seen as representing some of Labour’s virulently anti-Bush back-benchers, he is the best choice available for Washington. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are far more willing to indulge in the sort of emotive America-bashing that elicits nods and applause from British audiences.

The Bush White House seems to understand this. Cameron has yet to be invited to the U.S., and the Conservatives’ shadow chancellor, George Osborne, did not get a one-to-one with anyone in the administration when he attended Malaria Awareness Day at the White House recently.

As one Conservative adviser said of Brown, “Rhetorically, he may just sit in the center that we have been clawing back under Blair, but there won’t be a major difference for policy, not from [the U.S.] standpoint, at least.”

Brown may not support Bush on every foreign policy issue, but he will not let that change his positive views about the U.S. and its role in the world. Actually, that sounds a lot like the average American nowadays.

Alexandros Petersen is section director at the Henry Jackson Society in London.