IT WAS his last visit to Iraq as Prime Minister and it was as eventful as any that had gone before.
Tony Blair and his team were helicoptered into central Baghdad in a fleet of US Black Hawk gunships. Moments before his entourage set foot in the Green Zone, the heavily fortified area was rocked by three explosions.
Undaunted, Blair smiled incessantly, insisted progress was being made and promised ongoing support for the people of Iraq.
The Prime Minister's critics might argue that is an easy promise to make for a man about to leave office but Gordon Brown, his successor, has to deliver. And just how he heals the domestic political wounds caused by Iraq while helping to protect that country from even more bloodshed is one of the great challenges facing Brown.
"The muscular moralism of Tony Blair will be quietly shunted into the sidings," said Toby Dodge, consulting senior fellow for the Middle East at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
"Brown has been deeply involved in foreign policy but he is no crusader. But when he sees a failing government he prefers to work with it to improve it - not to rush in and overthrow it."
There could hardly be a more concise explanation of the distinction between Brown and Blair when it comes to their approach to matters beyond Britain's shores - and particularly in their assessment of how to work with President George Bush, and his eventual successor.
Brown has consistently been condemned for failing to back Blair during his darkest days, which were typically caused by the Prime Minister's international expeditions. Yet in their attitudes to the most pressing foreign policy matters of the day, the two men were remarkably in tune: apart from the behind-closed-doors agreements in Cabinet, Brown supported incursions in the Balkans, Sierra Leone and Afghanistan, and publicly voted in favour of the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
From his position somewhere behind Blair's shoulder, however, Brown has watched this series of foreign crises effectively destroy Blair's reputation for competence and integrity. Above all, the combination of Iraq and the perception of Blair as the Bush 'poodle' has been lethal.
Nowhere will the differences between Brown and Blair be as recognisable as in their dealings with Bush. The proposal to scale down the British presence in Iraq even more quickly than proposed by Blair is the clearest indication that Brown will revisit some of the key shibboleths of transatlantic relations over the past decade.
Where Blair saw the shared commitment in Iraq as the pinnacle of Anglo-American co- operation, for many it degenerated into the manifestation of their greatest failing. Brown is recognised as a committed 'Atlanticist' but he has no time for the type of expedition that has led America and the UK into conflict with many of their allies.
"Brown is a convinced Atlanticist and is likely to support an enduring close relationship," said Michael Codner, director of Military Sciences at the Royal United Services Institute. "But there are three reasons for possible change in particular common activities.
"He does not have the baggage of a close personal relationship with Bush, he does not have the conviction of Blair that decisions to date over Iraq were right, and there is a weak and weakening US administration with a Democratic Congress."
Put bluntly, there is a unique opportunity for a new broom to clean out the stables of a troubled relationship. A withdrawal announcement immediately after an election garnered priceless public approval at home for new administrations in Spain and Italy and would inevitably produce invaluable returns for the UK's new leader. But the Spanish and Italians squandered their good relations with a vengeful Bush administration, and that is not something Brown is prepared to risk.
While Brown was prepared to accept that "mistakes have been made" in Iraq, he also maintains that the operation was a just one which will not signal the end of the historic US-UK relationship. "There will always be a strong and special relationship with America," Brown insisted last week. "We share the same values of liberty, opportunity and freedom.''
It is an assessment that comes from the heart. Brown can boast a long-term affinity with the American Way, through decades holidaying in Cape Cod and mixing with the American political classes. "I do know that he is a great admirer of American entrepreneurship and risk taking," American commentator Irwin Steltzer told Scotland on Sunday, "and he has said that one of the things that disturbs him in Britain is the 'paucity of expectations' compared to people in the US."
Nonetheless, Brown pledges that once he is in No 10 Downing Street, "I will speak my mind'' and "be very frank'' with Bush, while focusing on "the British national interest".
It is a simple acknowledgement of the fundamental failings Blair appears to have made when sharing his glamorous hotline calls and whistle-stop visits with the most powerful man on the planet. Brown's valour is aided by the fact that any retaliation from Bush will be tempered by the knowledge that the president will be history in little more than 18 months.
Brown, who already has strong links with centrist Democrats and economic and foreign policymakers from the Clinton administration, is now working on the rising stars of the new Democrat establishment, notably new House speaker Nancy Pelosi and National Committee chairman Howard Dean.
But Brown is not simply clearing out an unpopular approach with no idea of what to do next. Apart from the fact that he has spent the last decade preparing for this moment, the Chancellor has also consciously maintained close contacts with like-minded politicians around the world - to the extent that Treasury aides have often complained of being "knackered" from the jet lag suffered while travelling with him.
Mark Leonard, of the Foreign Policy Centre, said: "Brown is likely to re-balance all three of Blair's strategies: restating the importance of British interests and British values; developing a more pragmatic policy of engagement with the European Union and a more hard-headed brand of Atlanticism."
New leader plans policy priorities
Despite the received wisdom, Gordon Brown maintains that he does not have a blizzard of announcements planned for his first 100 days in power. "You cannot do what people assume politics was about in the old days," he scolded in a recent interview. "You cannot just pull levers and expect things to happen."
But this is the man behind the decision to grant the Bank of England independence from government on Day One of New Labour's tenure. He has also been working on this moment for more than a decade.
• Health - a top priority. He has already floated the idea of putting the NHS under a semi-independent management board and is now hinting at a slowdown in the rate of private involvement;
• Education - extension of Blair's flagship city academies. Blairites have been pleased to hear Brown talk about "important structural changes" and embrace the prospect of using business as a partner;
• Welfare - Brown will stick to his pet tax credits scheme as the preferred method of redistributing wealth. He is also expected to carry through plans to restore the link between state pensions and average earnings;
• Defence - commanders fret about Brown's cost-cutting instincts, but allies increasingly hint about a "big announcement" - possibly the final approval for both the long-awaited new aircraft carriers for the Royal Navy, at a cost of £3.5bn.
• Foreign policy - less intervention, more engagement - including with Europe. Brown is already looking beyond the Bush administration to more moderate US leadership. Brown is even rumoured to be pondering closer links with Iran in an attempt to avoid a nuclear flare up, and to help improve prospects for Iraq and the wider Middle East.
