UK: Tony Blair battled to maintain the coherence of the allied position on Iraq yesterday amid speculation about possible changes to American tactics and policy, driven by the upcoming Congressional elections.
Under growing Conservative pressure for a parallel "reassessment" of strategy and goals to that taking place in Washington, the British prime minister insisted Britain intended to "hold its nerve" in Iraq.
While the Conservative-supporting Daily Telegraph declared it was time "to move towards a phased evacuation" of allied troops, Downing Street specifically denied telling the Iraqi government it must be ready to assume responsibility for policing the southern provinces of Iraq within a year.
Mr Blair's defiant "no change" message came as Downing Street talks apparently left Iraqi deputy prime minister Barham Salih confident Britain and the US did not intend to "cut and run".
That message was reinforced by British foreign secretary Margaret Beckett, who appeared to contradict junior minister Kim Howells by asserting there could be "no arbitrary deadline" set for the withdrawal of British troops.
Mr Salih, who also held talks with Mrs Beckett, acknowledged that British and US troops could not stay in his country indefinitely. "We understand this cannot be an open-ended commitment by the international community," he said. "It is up to the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government to establish security."
He expressed confidence that "come next year, you will be seeing Iraqi forces in the lead in many of the Iraqi provinces".
However, Mr Salih also said it was important Britain and the US did not "cut and run" as their support was still needed.
Mrs Beckett assured him there were no "false deadlines" for people to work towards in terms of troop withdrawals. "It would be a mistake to set some kind of false deadline for people to work towards," she said. "This is going step by step as it is possible and practicable to move forward."
Asked what sort of Iraq she had in mind, Mrs Beckett told the BBC's World at One programme that she wished to see a country that was democratic,"back on its feet" and which could "cope".
Asked whether or not Iraq might fragment, the foreign secretary said it was for the Iraqis themselves to decide if they wished to remain a single state.
"There is no doubt that in the earliest stages, what they most need is unity and what they most need is to support their elected government because it is the best game in town, if not the only game in town," she said.
"Everyone has been very keen to keep everyone together. But in the longer term, they have just set up a constitutional review. It is they, the Iraqis, who are conducting it. It is not for us to say 'you will do this' or 'you will do that'."
Mrs Beckett acknowledged that historians might eventually come to regard the invasion of Iraq as "a foreign policy disaster" for Britain: "Yes, they may. Then again, they may not."
However, she also suggested that the original timescale for transforming Iraq into a fully functioning democracy had probably been over-optimistic.