Brown to name his first war as PM after Blair
25 Sep 2006 by Henry France
In an effort to heal the wounds of the last few weeks, Gordon Brown will use the Labour conference to try to reconcile with the Blair camp. Insiders to the Brown camp say the Chancellor will discuss a package of items with the Prime Minister which will guarantee his legacy, including a promise to name the next war Britain is involved in after Blair.An insider to the Brown camp elaborated on how the decision was arrived at. "After all the Prime Minister has done for terrorism our first thought was to name the next terrorist attack after him. But after careful consideration we felt a war would be more of an event. It isn't easy for politicians to openly celebrate a terrorist attack. By contrast the start of a war is usually a cause for national celebration and one of the few times we can guarantee positive press coverage."
Initial response from the Blair camp has been encouraging. "We did have concerns about whether the future war would properly reflect the Prime Minister's ideals. Tony needs to feel passionately about anything he lends his name to," a Downing Street source told DeadBrain.
"But one of his greatest strengths is the flexibility of his thought process when committing his passion. The Iraq war was about the idealism of spreading democracy, the continuation of the Israeli conflict about hard-nosed real politick. So the chances are he could get comfortable with whatever it was. After all what makes Tony great is not what he believes, but that he believes."
Both sides denied rumours that Brown would guarantee to start the war before the next general election. "I think we need some flexibility in our foreign policy," said one Brown supporter. "We don't plan to use it, but it would be nice for it to be there."
It is thought that the Prime Minister would get the rights to the name and therefore benefit from the royalties of its use. "If he's really lucky and it's a big war he might get enough to pay off that mortgage in west London," commented media commentator Doug Ramsbottom. "Usually the level of coverage is tied to number of British casualties, so as long as we're in coalition with the US it should be very profitable."
