Dont Expect Brown to be Softer on the War on Terror

Perhaps the worst kept secret in British politics was the 1994 pact between Tony Blair and his Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown that at some point during his premiership, Blair would relinquish power to Brown. With Blair’s announcement on September 7, 2006 that he would step down as Prime Minister in the next twelve months, it is clear that foreign policy – and more particularly, his support of US foreign policy in Iraq, Lebanon, Iran and Israel - will have played an instrumental role in the demise of his popularity. If Brown becomes Prime Minister, he will be under immense pressure to re-assess foreign policy and the dynamics of the Anglo-American special relationship. Yet over nine years as Chancellor, Brown has rarely spoken out on foreign affairs. Despite recent speeches on “Britishness” and national security, it is unclear what approach Brown will adopt vis-à-vis the War on Terror.

Two days after an Al-Qaeda operation to use transatlantic flights as missiles against the United States was foiled, an open letter was sent to Tony Blair from leaders of prominent Muslim groups in the country. It called upon the Government to begin a complete over-haul of its foreign policy, which was claimed to be “ammunition to extremists.” The letter condemned the Government’s involvement in Iraq and the failure to stem Israeli aggression in Lebanon. Although the letter did - quite uncomfortably - echo the rhetoric of Islamic extremists, it was symptomatic of the growing anxiety and alienation felt by some British Muslims and their lack of faith in their Government to ensure that Islam maintains its dignity as a religion of peace.

Criticism of the Government’s stance on the War on Terror has been widely documented. Patrick Dunleavy, a professor at the London School of Economics has stated that "Iraq is now a breeding ground for terrorists. British troops are sustaining casualties and we have a very adverse profile right across the Middle East” and given the substantial Muslim population in the UK, the British Government has created “a substantial domestic problem that’s not going to go away”.

Those anticipating that a changing of the guard at the helm of British politics will alter British foreign policy and alleviate escalating tensions for British Muslims should think again. Whilst Gordon Brown is politically more left-wing than Blair and therefore less likely to emulate the close-knit relationship forged between Blair and George W. Bush, Brown is also regarded as an Atlanticist who vacations in Cape Cod and regularly meets academics at Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T).

In an interview with the tabloid newspaper ‘The Sun’ on September 8, 2006, Brown finally laid rest the questions that have plagued him since the admission that the country was in the final throes of a Blair Government. Brown loyally backed “courageous” Tony Blair over his forays into Afghanistan and Iraq, vowing to equal Blair’s robust stand against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban if he takes over as leader of the Labour Party. Brown laid out a broad policy agenda, pledging that Britain would remain “shoulder to shoulder” with the United States against terrorism and guaranteed that Britain would “continue to spend whatever it takes to meet the new security demands” at home and abroad. The timing of the Sun article was planned to quell speculation that once Prime Minister, he would order a complete withdrawal of British troops from Iraq - a move, which may have later been regarded as irresponsible since Iraq now needs the presence of international forces to help prevent the breakout of civil war.

Brown’s continued support of the United States may disenchant many, including factions within his own party. However, with the curtain now falling on Bush’s presidency, Brown would only have to pacify the current US administration for a further year and a half - after which he may pursue a more pragmatic course. Such action could prove vital to the resolution of the Iranian nuclear crisis. Moreover, if Brown was to adopt a more even-handed approach to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, he may win back much needed public support for the Government.

Under a Brown premiership, the UK may face more stringent anti-terror laws, which were implemented after the July 7, 2005 London bombings. Brown has stated that he would support police demands for the detention period of terror suspects to be increased from twenty-eight to ninety days. It should be noted that despite the fact that this exact endeavour caused Blair to suffer his first ever defeat in the House of Commons, Brown seems undeterred. Funding for anti-terror policies will also be revised. This has fuelled speculation that a specialised post for a minister for terrorism will be created in the near future.

Since the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, the UK has frozen £80 million in terrorist assets, including funds from more than 100 organisations linked to al-Qaeda. Reports in the British Press would suggest that Brown will look to clamp down on the channeling of funds to support terrorist activities. He also supports proposed legislation to introduce national identity cards and biometric passports which would aid security forces to root out harbingers of extremism. Finally, like Blair, Brown has supported a broader campaign to counter the radicalism that is infiltrating certain factions of the British Muslim community. He has stated that the UK “needed to mobilize the power of argument and ideas to expose and defeat the ideology of hate”.

So far, Brown has been careful to play down rumours that he may chart a different course on foreign policy to Blair. The British electorate has traditionally placed foreign policy low on its priorities but after years of courting controversy since the events of September 11, 2001, Brown will have to re-assess British foreign policy and the dynamics of the Anglo-American special relationship if he is to win the next general election.