BROWN –– BUSH:

The first visit to the USA by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown marked a new stage in the development of American-British ties after many years of extremely warm relations between George Bush and Tony Blair. The new British leader is a follower of "Atlanticism" - he knows America very well and loves it. He himself and his foreign secretary, David Miliband, have already said that this is what they intend to do.

The Russian factor might bring the foreign policy positions of the two countries together. In the recent period, Washington and London have had noticeable problems in their relations with Moscow: the British authorities are in conflict with Russia over Andrey Lugovoy's extradition, while the USA is unable to prove to Moscow that it is expedient to deploy missile defence systems in Europe. In the run-up to the prime minister's visit to Washington, British defence minister Des Browne said that London has agreed to install an American radar station at the Royal Air Force base Menwith Hill near Harrogate in North Yorkshire within as part of the US missile defence system. "Britain will continue cooperating with the USA and its NATO allies to develop a common missile defence system, which might be set up on the basis of Washington's initiatives," the minister said in his address to parliament. Moreover, Brown stressed that if there is a threat to its security Britain is also ready to deploy American interceptor missiles on its territory.

Negotiations between the US and British leaders on their bilateral agenda coincided with heated discussions about Russian both in the US Congress and the British Parliament. Both capitals expressed particular displeasure with elements of Russian President Vladimir Putin's speech at a meeting with top officers in the Kremlin, in which the Russian president gave the following assessment of global threats: "…The plans to deploy new American bases in Eastern Europe are moving forward more and more actively. The process of ratifying the Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty is being delayed in every possible way, as a result of which Russia was forced to suspend the CFE Treaty and related international agreements… The growing imbalance is not restricted to the sphere of conventional forces. In Poland and the Czech Republic, it is planned to deploy a positional sector of the missile defence system. In essence, American strategic weapons are appearing in Europe." In Washington, the chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Tom Lantos, called on the USA and Europe "to restore the trans-Atlantic alliance" in order to counter "Moscow's anti-Western and anti-American policy". The influential congressman, who often takes the toughest stances on Russia, which representatives of the administration cannot afford to do, listed his main complaints against Moscow: its withdrawal from the CFE Treaty, opposition to the US plans to deploy missile defence systems in Eastern Europe and the energy blackmail of its closest neighbours. In this respect, the Russian press has made the assumption that, after the negotiations between Bush and Brown, the trans-Atlantic alliance proposed by Tom Lantos will become even more visible.

It is interesting that, at the same time as Gordon Brown's visit, the USA was visited by a top delegation from Moscow, led by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Kislyak. In Washington, the Russian delegation tried to promote Vladimir Putin's ideas, proposed at Kennebunkport and at the G8 summit in Heilgendamm, on the use of the Qabala radar station in Azerbaijan and the radar station that is being built in Armavir as an alternative to the deployment of a missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic, the Russian press reports. It is notable that before the USA, Sergey Kislyak had visited Azerbaijan, where he discussed the use of the Qabala radar station with President Ilham Aliyev, Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov and Defence Minister Safar Abiyev. This emphasized the important and basic role, in the direct and indirect meaning, which Azerbaijan plays in the discussions on this project between Moscow and Washington. The official spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, Mikhail Kamynin, stressed before the Russian delegation's visit to the USA that, "the Russian proposals are an alternative, not an addition, to the US plans to deploy elements of the missile defence system in Europe." He said that the Russian initiatives have a "package nature", "separate provisions cannot be taken from them", and all work to deploy missile defence systems in Europe should be frozen during the Russian-American negotiations.

In any case, Russia's initiatives have not been able to change US plans for the time being. A representative of the US Missile Defence Agency, Rick Lehner, said that the Pentagon has already selected a subcontractor to build the radar in the Czech Republic and to build 10 interceptor missiles in Poland. This will be the Boeing Corporation, which will receive 80 million dollars for the first stage of the contract as soon as the US defence budget is adopted. Although, quite recently, the US Congress House Committee on Appropriations cut the White House request to finance the missile defence system by 139 million dollars (this is the sum required for creating the facilities in Poland), preparations in the Pentagon are going ahead at full speed. Polish President Lech Kaczynski, who visited the USA, promised to sign the agreement with Washington by September, while the US Senate declared the deployment of the missile defence system in Eastern Europe an element of American state policy. For the time being, Boeing will be able to use the budget money required for the first stage of the deployment of the missile defence system in Eastern Europe - the transportation of a radar installation from the Marshall Islands to the Czech Republic. It is important to point out here that the support which Gordon Brown expressed for the US policy in Washington will definitely help George Bush to turn the bases in the Czech Republic and Poland into the foundation of the common European security system that is being created under the aegis of NATO and the European Union. This means that the US administration will be motivated to support London even more actively in its confrontation with the Russian authorities.

In Washington, the British prime minister also discussed with the US president a whole number of other important issues of world politics. London has quite a clear position on the most important problem - Iraq: there will be no hasty withdrawal of British troops from Iraq. However, Gordon Brown has already announced "a new stage", and there are signs that he wants to leave Iraq as soon as possible, but within a framework that fits into the policy of handing over power to the Iraqi administration, and no earlier than Iraqis themselves are able to accept this power. Moreover, he said that London will make a decision to withdraw its troops and hand over control of the British sector to Iraqis only on the basis of the opinion of the British military in Iraq. This vague formulation calmed Washington which "sees the British military presence in Iraq as a criterion of the reliability and loyalty of the new British leader", London's International Herald Tribune writes.

Britain will also preserve its military presence in Afghanistan. Of course, London would like as many NATO members as possible to join this role. Washington wants the same.

One of the key issues that might play a decisive role in US-British relations is that of Iran. In September, the UN will discuss, and probably approve, new sanctions against Tehran, but what if the Bush administration, in their last 18 months in the White House, decides to strike at Iran's nuclear sites? Brown does not rule out the use of force. It is believed that if he did so, he would have somewhat undermined the diplomatic and economic pressure that is being exerted on Iran. Nevertheless, most observers believe that even if the United States decides to carry out strikes, Brown will not support America. They expect that Brown will only support the UN sanctions against Iran over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment.

Unlike Tony Blair, Gordon Brown is not so interested in the Palestinan-Israeli problem. For this reason, Britain will probably not play a leading role in the Middle East settlement under Brown. This probably coincides with London's opinion that no individual European country has enough influence there. Brown appointed the former British ambassador to Israel, Simon McDonald, to be his foreign policy adviser. This appointment was well-received by Israelis, who regard McDonald as "a friend of Israel". Gordon Brown will probably be interested in the issue of economic development in the Palestinian territories. During his visit to Israel and the Palestinian Authority in 2005, he brought the Israeli and Palestinian economy ministers together for the first time in many years.

One of the most important tasks of the US administration is definitely to clarify the contradictory signals coming from members of the British government concerning the future of mutual relations with Washington. One such signal is the appointment of Marc Mallock Brown to the post of deputy foreign secretary. He was one of the most prominent critics of the Bush administration when he worked for the UN, and his appointment to the Foreign Office was seen by many as an attempt to keep a distance from American neo-conservatives. On the other hand, Britain does not really want closer rapprochement with the European Union, preferring pragmatism in European integration and keeping firmly to its own foreign policy. In this regard, one of the leading experts on the foreign policy of the new Prime Minister, Paul Reynolds, thinks that while in the post of finance minister, Brown was more interested in the practical policy of the EU rather than disputes about the work of its institutions. In his opinion, Britain's membership of the EU should not restrict flexibility, the free market or pragmatism. An analytical article published by the International Affairs magazine in March says that Brown will be "an awkward partner" or a "pragmatic player", but he will not put Britain at the forefront of European integration. John Cunliffe, a former employee of the Treasury, will be the prime minister's adviser on EU affairs. He is well-aware of Brown's views on European issues. Brown did not allow Britain to adopt the euro and will probably continue this policy. In the future, he will have to solve problems related to Turkey's membership of the EU, state reforms in agricultural subsidies and Britain's fees into the EU budget. This independent approach was also reflected in the recent confrontation with Moscow over the Litvinenko case, during which London did not ask the European Union for official support.

At the same time, Brown was in a difficult situation before his meeting with George Bush, BBC political correspondent Nick Robinson stressed. On the one hand, he had to persuade Bush of his loyalty to pan-Atlantic relations, and on the other, to persuade British voters that his relations with the United States will be different from those that were established by the former prime minister, Tony Blair. Earlier, the new British cabinet called for an "impartial" international policy and for closer cooperation with European countries.

The former British ambassador to the USA, Sir Christopher Meyer, does not accept the assumption that Gordon Brown is not capable of distancing himself from the US president. "There is a lot of fuss about it," Sir Christopher said. "Thousands of seminars have been held on this subject, but I don't think that such a level of activity will go on. They will not be too close from a personal point of view - if nothing magical happens - but to be honest, this does not really matter. There are so many and various components in these relations, and though there have been variable personalities, events and changes of tone, historically these relations have been permanent since 1945, despite everything."

The results of Gordon Brown's visit to the USA on the whole confirmed this evaluation of the British diplomat. Both capitals have so much in common in issues of world and regional (Afghanistan and Iraq) politics, world trade and the war on terror that they cannot afford to subject their bilateral relations to danger or crisis. From a geopolitical point of view, London's independent role in the international arena, and its positions in the struggle for influence in Europe with continental giants like Germany and France, largely depend on political support from the other side of the ocean. It is another matter that the new prime minister will not be so close to President Bush, unlike Tony Blair, whose pro-American policy had become a subject of humiliating cartoons and comparisons in Britain, and will try to pursue a more balanced and independent policy, while preserving his strategic policy of developing trans-Atlantic relations.