Guest editorial: Bush and the Brits

Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, it was thought, would celebrate their joint triumph in Iraq; the visit would be a sort of victory lap for the American president. While the war in Iraq went well, the occupation and rebuilding have not.

And Blair has paid a fearful political price. Two Cabinet ministers resigned in protest; his approval ratings have dropped to the 33 percent mark; he is bedeviled by antiwar protesters, and his Iraq policy has little support within his own party. The same protesters have promised massive demonstrations during Bush's visit this week.

The security for Bush's visit -- he is staying at Buckingham Palace -- is massive, and the resulting paralysis of central London has become an issue in itself, giving Britain's tabloids another reason to pick on the American president.

In Britain, as elsewhere in Europe, Bush has been unfairly portrayed as a not very bright, shoot from the hip cowboy, recklessly insensitive to international norms. There is little the president can do to change that and certainly not overnight.

But even our good friends among the British leadership complain that the Bush administration can be deaf or dismissive over their concerns: the British nationals held indefinitely at Guantanamo; tactical disagreements over pacifying Iraq; steel tariffs; the White House's total and uncritical support of Israeli leader Ariel Sharon; the refusal to entertain any reservations about global warming.

Some American deference to Blair's concerns is in order. As Bush said of the prime minister, "He's a smart, capable and trustworthy friend." And one we need to keep.