LONDON — At the recent Republican National Convention, First Lady Laura Bush recalled an "intense" meeting at Camp David between her husband and Tony Blair, his British ally in the campaign against Saddam Hussein. At the mention of the prime minister's name, the delegates applauded.
So it might come as a surprise: Blair would like to see somebody else occupying the White House.
Or at least that's the buzz in the political talking classes here. For the record, Blair has struck a strictly neutral pose. He easily deflected a reporter's question about his preference at a news conference last week, saying that the choice of president is for the American people alone.
But in a delicate political minuet, an envoy from Blair's left-of-center Labor Party had just been in the United States on a semiprivate visit, meeting with Democratic leaders and activists in New York. The message being delivered was that Labor's traditional friendship with the party was intact and that Blair stood more than ready to cooperate with a Democratic administration should John F. Kerry win the November election.
At the same time, Progress magazine -- independent, but considered the favored mouthpiece of Blair's "modernist" wing of the Labor Party -- came out with a lacerating editorial criticizing President Bush's style and handling of the presidency and concluding that "those who recognize that American leadership is both vital, and a force for good in an uncertain world, will wish John Kerry well on 2 November."
The piece, penned by the magazine's editor, Robert Philpot, signaled where the Blair camp genuinely stands. It was headlined "The Real Deal."
"I think it is fairly obvious that if Blair were to draw a personal preference, he would want Kerry to win," John Rentoul, chief political commentator for the Independent on Sunday, said in an interview. "However, he is not going to say so."
The advantage to Blair of a Kerry White House is obvious, said one Labor commentator close to Downing Street's thinking. "We will have an administration in Washington that is far more in touch with the one here in London, and actually could take some of the more difficult decisions," the source said, requesting anonymity because of Blair's edict to appear neutral.
Support for Bush -- or lack of it -- among foreign leaders has intermittently emerged in the presidential campaign.
