James Forsyth talks to insiders in Washington and London about the biggest dilemma facing the next Prime Minister — and finds that, as much as Brown might like to break free of an unpopular conflict, his options are severely limited
To date, though, Brown’s comments on Iraq have been anodyne. There has been no thorough analysis of what went wrong. He acknowledges that the war has been ‘divisive’, hardly a novel insight. He stresses the importance of economic reconstruction, rightly citing the massive unemployment in Iraq as a failure of the Coalition. Unemployment in Iraq hasn’t dropped below 25 per cent since the invasion and might now be as high as 40 per cent. But this failure is actually the product of another failure: the failure to create order, without which economic revival will remain a pipe dream.
Even those who argue that Iraq is still salvageable do not believe there is much opportunity to push economic reconstruction in the current circumstances. But the Bush administration will be keen to work with Brown on it, if only to keep him on board. Brown’s overwhelming emphasis on the importance of economics in creating peace is met with a roll of the eyes by many foreign-policy experts. Certainly, the view that more jobs would have instantly healed the scars of decades of totalitarian brutalisation in Iraq or that freer trade between Israel and Palestine will lead to the end of that conflict is as naive as the neocon dream that a democratic tsunami would follow the liberation of Iraq. Yet a former Bush administration official, who did not always have the easiest relationship with Brown, praises him for his work on the issue. He predicts that there will be ‘more robust development carry over to Afghanistan and Iraq’ under this new partnership.
Brown creates a division in Washington. If you’re a Democrat, or work in development, you probably know him and respect him. If you’re a ‘hard-power guy’ and a Republican, he’s a mystery to you. His contacts with the Bush administration to date have been mixed. He had a disastrous meeting with Condoleezza Rice in February 2005, revealed in this magazine. Considering that Rice is almost family to Bush (she once referred to him as ‘my husband’ at a Washington dinner party) this could be a major stumbling block. But set against that is an excellent relationship with the treasury secretary, Hank Paulson, the coming power in the administration.
More articles from: James Forsyth | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
1 Terry shouldn’t be captain, but that should be Capello’s decision to make - Rod Liddle
2 Snow? What snow? - Rod Liddle
3 JFK: The Nastiest President of the Twentieth Century? - Alex Massie
4 Do we really need to know more about Gary Speed’s death? - Rod Liddle
5 Scottish Labour Embrace the Logic of Independence - Alex Massie
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Be the first to comment on this article!
Back to top