A political year in Britain that could not come soon enough is finally upon us. A prime minister, who should have been forced out of office in 2003 for presiding over the greatest foreign-policy disaster for half a century, bought himself some more time. After an attempted coup in September that was only partly successful, but successful enough, Tony Blair will, in a few months, be gone. His chosen successors have fallen, too, leaving only one man in the frame, a man with many doubters to overcome.
For Gordon Brown, foreign policy will be only one of many challenges. But it is the most immediate; it is the area that caught Blair unawares, exposed his naivety and hubris, and was his undoing. Brown, for all his remarkable decade at the Treasury, is little versed in the intricacies of diplomacy. He has a record of impatience with European and other summitry, and has travelled less extensively than might be expected of a politician of his experience.
Brown has kept his counsel on foreign policy, but behind the scenes, work is being done. He will define himself against his predecessor's adventurism, stressing his greater pragmatism. But there are other lessons he should learn. He should shed the delusions of grandeur that afflict British leaders, notably the "special relationship" with America, which has long been one of subservience. With China, India and others challenging the US, Brown would be wise to conclude that Britain will exercise what influence it has mainly through its role in the EU and other multilateral forums.
One of Brown's first tasks must be to shake up and revive the Foreign Office. Our interview on page 12 with Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, shows how rudderless the department has become.
International co-operation, which Blair and George W Bush ignored during their brief neoconservative hegemony, is sorely needed. China will be crucial in weaning North Korea from its nuclear and isolationist path. A more variegated approach will be required towards Iran, whose nuclear and other ambitions have been enhanced by the west's débâcle in Iraq. As everyone but Bush appears now to accept, it is only through engagement with hostile states such as Iran and Syria that progress will be made across the Middle East, from Lebanon to Gaza.
Closer to home, a new threat is posed by a resurgent Russia, which is using its near monopoly in energy to reassert power. The west's recent approach to the Kremlin has been confused. Germany's EU presidency could provide further irritation, particularly if it pursues its plan to resurrect the constitutional treaty. Brown may be tempted to succumb to the howls of protest from Britain's army of Eurosceptics, but he would be wise to adopt a cleverer approach.
Despite the crises ahead, Brown has an opportunity to do what Robin Cook sought to do - to introduce an ethical dimension into a foreign policy that, for all Blair's Manichaean rhetoric, is riddled with double standards and hypocrisy. There is little evidence so far that Brown will change the British government's active promotion of arms sales and selective outrage over human-rights abuses. His announcements on environmental policy, as Mark Lynas points out on page 28, leave much to be desired, while his agreement to a renewal of Trident was regrettable and predictable.
In one area, Brown has shown genuine passion: his commitment to Africa. Britain has done more than most, but the latest OECD figures paint a gloomy picture. Real, long-term flows of development aid to sub-Saharan Africa actually fell in 2005. The legacy of Blair and Bush is to have made 2006 a fortuitous moment for the world's dictators. Rarely can a superpower have been so denuded of credibility and global forums so drained of confidence. The weak response to the mass killings and rapes in Darfur are testimony to that.
New thinking is required to revive the good intentions of humanitarianism that were shattered by Iraq. The NS will seek to be at the forefront of that thinking in 2007, promoting new ideas on all areas of foreign affairs and domestic policy. Having waited so long, Brown now has a good chance to address the mistakes his predecessor has made - at home and abroad.
When a certain customer is king
Compliments of the season to all you ethical consumers. We hope you are, at this moment, quaffing the organic red, deciding to keep the turkey as a pet, and paying a homeless asylum-seeker the minimum wage (at least) to peel you an additive-free Fairtrade grape.
But we are not scoffing. Let's leave that to the lugubrious free-trade champions who claim your good intentions are a pathway to hell. The Economist, for example, recently editorialised that buying Fairtrade, organic and local will end up destroying rainforests and unfairly favouring the Gloucester Old Spot pig over frozen New Zealand lamb. What rot. When the champions of wealthy corporate concerns express dismay at the way you are spending your money, you can be sure you must be doing something right.
In fact, fair-traders have good reason to be proud that their ethical choices are beginning to drive corporate policy-making. Sainsbury's, the third-largest grocery retailer in Britain, has just announced that from now on its shops will sell only Fairtrade bananas. According to Harriet Lamb, director of the Fairtrade Foundation which, in co-operation with NGOs such as Oxfam, monitors use of the Fairtrade label: "The impact on the banana farmers and their communities will be hugely significant." Which, given that the banana market is characterised by corruption, cruelty and slave labour, is no mean achievement. Compliments of the season, yes indeed!
