Jon Bright (London, OK): David Mepham and David Held have an article up on openDemocracy today outlining Gordon Brown's foreign policy challenges. As Kanishk Tharoor recently pointed out on these pages, a change in style of the transatlantic special relationship could be significant in itself. But Mepham and Held correctly argue that Brown will need to do more than wear a tie to Camp David to improve Britain's tarnished image abroad. Their prescription is a wish-list from fans of multilateralism and global governance - focus on human rights, hearts and minds, universal values and creative diplomacy.
Above all, they argue for a new commitment to "values" in foreign policy. This is interesting. As the ever acute Simon Tisdall points out, the Iraq blame game is going to begin as soon as withdrawals do. One important wrangle for those, such as Mepham and Held, who advocate "universal values" such as democracy, and their worldwide promotion, will be for their project not to get caught up in the quagmire. Small wonder they are recasting Blair's foreign policy as one based on "interests".
It's possible to remain sympathetic to their viewpoint whilst disagreeing with their logic. In an ideal world I would prefer to see forms of democracy spread - no controversy there. But it's disingenuous to say that Bush and Blair didn't also have this in mind. Conspiracies about oil lobbyists aside, Iraq was invaded precisely to spread democracy. This has been a catastrophic failure. I'm not saying we should therefore abandon all hope of it's wider introduction, but let's at least learn some lessons: a values based foreign policy might not be the sea change it appears.
