Test for Blair-Bush relationship
By Robin Oakley
CNN European Political Editor
LONDON, England (CNN) -- Just how pleased was Tony Blair to see George W. Bush returned for a second U.S. presidential term? And just how much of a payoff will Bush give the British prime minister for his loyal support on Iraq and other issues?
Those are the two questions underlining Thursday's meeting between the president and the man who has earned a mark of favor as one of the first foreign leaders to be invited to the White House since Bush's election victory.
The conventional wisdom was that Blair would have looked badly isolated if Bush had gone down following the defeat of the Spanish Conservatives -- who backed the war in Iraq and saw their Socialist opponents sweep to power after the Madrid bombings.
But many in Blair's Labour Party, including a number of ministers, were arguing that it would have been better if Bush's Democratic challenger, Sen. John Kerry, had won.
Their worry is that Bush has fought and won his election, theirs is still to come next spring, and they do not fancy going into that contest with Blair, whose weak spot with the electors is on Iraq, still tied to a President who remains deeply unpopular in the UK.
Kerry, they argue, would have offered the chance of a fresh start. Even if there had been a little frostiness to begin, with that would soon have been surmounted, they say.
Labour traditionally gets on better with Democrats than Republicans. Even if Kerry had resented the Bush-Blair linkup, he would hardly have wanted to pick a fight with a man who remains the most popular foreign leader in the U.S. -- nor with the leader of a country maintaining 9,000 troops in Iraq when others are pulling out.
Blair remains under fire at home, both within his own party and among opposition Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, for having little to show for his loyalty to Bush except those regular invitations to the White House.
Michael Ancram, the Conservative spokesman on foreign affairs, told CNN: "Too often in the past, Tony Blair has gone to Washington and instead of pressing the British case or British arguments, he has effectively done what the president asked him to do and forgotten that he should be arguing Britain's corner."
Blair has himself signaled what many are seeing as the test case for Bush's second-term intentions and his own ability to influence the president.
At this year's Labour Party conference in September, Blair declared: "The party knows the depth of my commitment to the Middle East peace process and shares my frustration at the lack of progress. ... After November I will make its revival a personal priority."
As some Israeli ministers have noted with trepidation, Bush's freedom of maneuver is increased by the fact that he cannot seek further re-election. And aides say Blair wants to hold the president to his promise that he would invest as much time and energy in the Middle East peace process as Blair has done in recent years on Northern Ireland.
The removal from the equation, they argue, of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat also gives Bush a reason for starting again without looking as if he is succumbing to pressure.
But if Bush has a greater freedom of maneuver, that increases the pressure on Blair to demonstrate he can galvanise the president into new efforts to revive the "road map" and the Middle East peace process.
The president's father, former U.S. President George Bush, says Blair will be pushing at an open door. He reminded the BBC's David Frost that George W. Bush is the first U.S. president to back a separate Palestinian state and predicted that Blair would find him a "willing and able partner."
Downing Street acknowledges Blair's eagerness to give "impetus and direction" to the Middle East peace process and says the talks with the president will also include Iraq, Iran and EU-U.S. relations.
No. 10 officials are playing down the idea that Blair plans to stage a Middle East peace conference in London. But many in his party reckon that Blair will have to come back from Washington with clear signs of new momentum in the peace process if he is not to face renewed criticism over his ties to Bush.
