'The critics will say: but how can the world be a community? Nations act in their own self-interest. Of course they do. But what is the lesson of the financial markets, climate change, international terrorism, nuclear proliferation or world trade? It is that our self-interest and our mutual interests are woven together. That is the politics of globalisation."
This passage from Tony Blair's bravura speech to the British Labour Party conference on Tuesday pinpoints one of the essential lessons to be learned from the crisis unfolding since the attacks on New York and Washington last month.
International co-operative action is the only way to tackle it constructively. No one country - not even the United States - can go it alone.
Blair combined passionate commitment and theoretical originality in presenting his audience with a vision of a reordered world made possible by applying his chosen principles of community, justice and internationalism. As he put it: "This is a moment to seize. The kaleidoscope has been shaken. The pieces are in flux. Soon they will settle again. Before they do, let us reorder this world around us."
Conveying the sense that a better world can emerge from adversity is a vital function of political leadership. One does not have to agree fully with Blair's substantive message or proposed methods to recognise that he has performed a signal service in spelling out this message of hope. He also conveyed the urgency of the task and its vulnerability to mismanagement of events. How the world responds will shape it for many years to come.
His speech returned again and again to the necessity for international co-operation. "Round the world, September 11th is bringing governments and people to reflect, consider and change.
"And in this process, amidst all the talk of war and action, there is another dimension appearing.
"There is a coming together. The power of community is asserting itself. We are realising how fragile are our frontiers in the face of the world's new challenges. Conflicts rarely stay within national boundaries".
He applied these insights to a remarkable range of international and national issues, including Africa's political and economic crises, the Middle East, Kyoto and climate change and globalisation. The issue is not to stop globalisation, he argued, but "how we use the power of community to combine it with justice".
Blair has a long-standing interest in and commitment to communitarian ethics, which have informed his revision of social democracy. His originality lies in applying them to the international as well as the national scene. What, he asks, is the answer to the current crisis? "Not isolationism but the world coming together with America as a community."
Two clear political targets are thereby challenged. The first one is identified by the reference to American isolationists. In truth they have been a casualty of the events since September 11th.
But isolationism is not a viable option or even a strong current within the US political class.
His real target is better defined as the unilateralists on the hard right of the Bush administration who would prefer to use the US's military strength as a superpower to go it alone through this crisis as far as possible, untrammelled by alliance or United Nations commitments.
Their battle for influence against the multilateralists led by the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, has been one of the crucial factors in the unfolding political drama.
So far the multilateralists are in the ascendant, their case resting solidly on the necessity to construct a broad alliance against international terrorist groups. But it is still too early to say they have definitely won. Once military action is taken there will be ample scope for mismanagement or broadening targets out to include Iraq and other states accused of harbouring such groups.
Their hard right allies in Israel are in no mood to do the needful and seek peace with the Palestinians.
This is dangerous territory and there are some dangerous men angling for control in Washington.
Blair's political instinct to identify immediately and fully with President Bush and the American people must be seen partly in the context of this political battle for multilateralism in a changing world.
His second target was identified in the next sentence of his speech when he asked: "What is the answer to Britain's relations with Europe? Not opting out, but being leading members of a community in which, in alliance with others, we gain strength."
Again, this is an old theme of Blair's. But he used it to great effect on Tuesday by making his most forward statement to date on joining the euro, thereby putting Britain in a position genuinely to influence Europe's development.
If the five economic conditions set in 1997 are met, he said, "we should join, and if met in this parliament, we should have the courage of our argument, to ask the British people for their consent in this parliament".
This seized the political initiative from the more sceptical Gordon Brown within the party and associates Blair's enhanced authority and political capital arising from the crisis with a campaign to join the single currency.
To the new Conservative leadership who appropriate patriotism and Europhobia it will be an immense challenge.
Blair's speech reminds us that the world has changed profoundly in a short period of time.
Citizens look to political leaders for effective governance in such times of crisis. Major questions are thereby posed not only for transatlantic relations but for European integration as a result.
Blair's call for co-operative action contains within it a demand that the US's European partners be treated more equally. A long-term process of equalisation is under way in transatlantic relations and will be shaped by these events. and will be shaped by these events.
That changed context is likely to alter the terms of the European Union's debate on its future as well. European integration will be deepened in response to the crisis, as has already been seen in the sphere of justice and home affairs.
The necessity to plan for greater security as the US diverts its attention elsewhere will consolidate the Rapid Reaction Force.
A remarkable indication of changing attitudes came from President Putin this week, when he spoke about the possibility of Russia joining NATO if it is truly being transformed in a political direction.
Ireland's debate on the future of Europe and whether to hold another referendum on the Nice Treaty will also be affected by this new context.
Tolstoy's celebrated remark that "you may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you" applies to the many people who abstained in the June referendum because they wanted more time to consider its implication or who simply disregarded its importance.
Confronted with a choice about staying in the mainstream of an increasingly effective EU in the midst of such a crisis, they are more likely to vote Yes next time.
pgillespie@irish-times.ie
