|
In the war against terrorism George W Bush and the United States will find no more reliable ally than Great Britain. Prime Minister Tony Blair has stood shoulder to shoulder with President Bush ever since 11th September. Nothing has knocked the alliance off course - not even Bush's imposition of steel tariffs which shocked Bush's British admirers who had expected something more principled from a Republican President.
Tony Blair's support for military action against the Taleban regime was opposed by a small minority of his Labour Party's Members of Parliament (MPs). But his support for Bush over possible action against Iraq is proving more politically difficult for him. Although he enjoys the support of the Conservative Opposition a majority of his own MPs oppose any military intervention. Tony Blair is the only European Union Head of Government to support American policy on Iraq.
From World War II through to the 1991 Gulf War, Britain and America have stood together in many of the great causes of the last century. Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were unyielding in their opposition to the evil Soviet empire. Tony Blair's solidarity with America is steeped, therefore, in our two countries' common commitment to freedom and the need to defend our way of life from many opponents.
That is not to say that there have not been differences between our two countries. The greatest area of tension has paradoxically been over the war on terrorism - a war that Britain has been fighting for much longer than America. Whilst the Irish Republican Army was murdering British soldiers and civilians, for example, large sums of money from Irish Americans funded the IRA.
But on the campaign against Iraq, Bush and Blair share the same moral compass. Saddam has a track record of evil deeds and common sense points to the likelihood of repeat offending. Both men understand that short-sighted inaction is the choice of cowards.
Their moral agreement on international policy is surprising given the gulf between the two men's overall worldviews. Although both attend church they differ fundamental issues such as attitudes to life, family and freedom of religion.
Tony Blair, for example, supports abortion and his party has been intolerant of its small pro-life caucus. The Labour Life Group has repeatedly been refused a stand at the annual party conference. The Blair government has introduced the most pro-cloning legislation in the western world.
Although Tony Blair is a good father and husband, his family policies are Clintonesque. Labour has campaigned to lift a ban on the promotion of homosexuality in schools. It abolished the last recognition of marriage in the tax system. It is considering legislation on same-sex partnerships. It has stopped funding for marriage-based counselling services and diverted the money to homosexual advocacy groups.
On religious freedom issues, Labour scorned a Conservative proposal to establish an International Envoy for Religious Freedom. Blair maintains a ban on national Christian broadcasting whilst faith-based poverty-fighting groups are facing active discrimination.
The opposition Conservative party will recover as people grow tired of Tony Blair's failure to tackle deep-seated problems. The breakdown of law and order is at the heart of people's worries and many forms of crime are now higher in London than New York. Britain's National Health Service - once a source of national pride - now ships patients to France because our own socialised system can't cope. British agriculture - ravaged by the foot and mouth epidemic - remains in a state of crisis.
But for the moment Tony Blair continues to enjoy large opinion poll leads - mainly because of the buoyant UK economy. In fact the Conservatives have trailed Labour for the best part of a decade by an average of twenty percentage points.
To some extent Conservatives have been living in the 1970s when Britain had the sickest economy in Europe. Margaret Thatcher changed that but Conservatives have not stepped beyond her considerable shadow. The Conservative party is now, however, showing signs of understanding its plight and the need for a radical overhaul of priorities. Nowhere is this more obvious than a renewed Conservative focus on the problems of Britain's poorest communities.
Millions of poor people in Britain have not been touched by rising stock markets, government welfare initiatives or technological progress. They have lacked the compassionate attention of another human being. That is why Conservatives are interested in Republican ideas on faith-based social action and character education. But we are also watching Bush to learn from his mistakes as well as his vision. British Conservatives are worried that the federal government might become too too entangled in the running of schools and the detail of how faith-based groups rescue poor communities.
There is certainly no chance of Blair adopting Compassionate Conservatism. The Bush-Blair coalition begins and ends with the war on terrorism.
Related links
Bush's first year
How do we pursue an ethical defence policy?
Printer friendly page
| |
