“Brave” was how most of the British press responded to Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s speech to both houses of Congress in Washington.
Brown was the first European leader to be invited to Washington by the new U.S. administration and was only the fifth British prime minister to speak to a joint session of Congress.
The front pages of the broadsheets were dominated with the speech and leader writers agonised on whether the so-called special relationship between the two countries is still intact.
With an eye on the upcoming G20 meeting of leading nations in London on April 2, Brown called for the U.S. and their European allies to work together through the global economic crisis.
He was praised for his warning against protectionism and his “passionate” plea on tackling poverty in Africa.
It was a speech where Brown “rose to the occasion”, Peter Hyman, former speechwriter to ex-British Prime Minister Tony Blair, wrote in the The Guardian.
“Yesterday, Brown didn’t just give us substance but a little style too.”
It had “passion”, Kafka and even a reference to a Puritan founder of New England, the paper said.
“The speech was delivered with passion and was full of good lines; even a bit of poetry,” Hyman added.
“To this audience, religious rhetoric, like manna from heaven, is scooped up with open arms. And Brown didn’t hold back, Biblical soundbites flowed.”
The broadsheet Daily Telegraph said: “Gordon Brown … found eloquent and moving words to describe this country’s unique relationship with the United States and capture the common purpose of the wars we have fought together.
“More important, he found brave words when he tackled head-on the protectionist instincts that are so powerful in the United States and which could hamper the world’s economic recovery.”
The Daily Mail’s leader described it as a “serious and sombre speech for serious and sombre times”.
“Mr Brown merits praise for refusing to pull his punches (unlike his predecessor, whose idea of the special relationship was to fawn on American presidents).
“…If the special relationship is to mean anything, it must be based on honesty and not platitudes.”
But The Guardian leader was critical, saying the speech was limited and full of flattery.
“A brave speechmaker challenges his audience and a cautious one flatters them. Gordon Brown spoke to Congress yesterday with all the daring of a lover clutching a bunch of slightly wilted flowers.
“He said very little that was new, and nothing that was shocking.
“…Perhaps respect encouraged him to be too cautious, when a more critical friend would have been blunter.
“He passage on protectionism pulled its punches. He did not blame America for the crash, as he so often does at home.”
The tabloid Sun newspaper questioned the extent of the special relationship, pointing out that while Brown received 19 standing ovations, Congress was depleted.
“While Congress was packed, it was not with politicians,” the paper’s political editor George Pascoe-Watson wrote in an opinion piece.
“There were many ’staffers’ and interns taking up seats. Gone are the days when a British PM was such a star draw that Tony Blair was cheered as he walked through US hotel lobbies.
“Mr Brown left America last night with a vastly different Special Relationship.
“A new President has taken over - and it is hard to claim he and the PM have an obvious chemistry.
“President Obama paid lip service to the bonds between America and Britain. Things are definitely not what they used to be.”
But the International Herald Tribune said the chamber “was nearly full”, adding the interns “who are sometimes summoned to fill empty seats on such occasions were relatively few in number”.
While the visit dominated the British press, papers in the U.S. were less obsessed. They did look at the special relationship, suggesting it had cooled.
“The address came a day after President Obama assured Mr. Brown that the “special relationship” between the countries was as strong as ever, despite what some people have described as coolness in the handling of the prime minister’s visit,” the New York Times wrote.
The Internatational Herald Tribune referred to the same coolness, harking back to the close bond between former leaders George W. Bush and Blair.
“Commentators on both sides of the Atlantic have catalogued a number of signs that the reception accorded to Brown in Washington was not quite as warm as the ones British prime ministers enjoyed during the Bush years: No invitation to Camp David, no full-scale news conference, no state dinner - and while there was a meeting between the men’s wives, none was held between the two couples.”
But as the Daily Mail pointed out, Brown was still pleased to have beaten French President Nicolas Sarkozy to Barack Obama’s door.
Brown could not hide “his satisfaction” at becoming the first European leader invited by Barack Obama, it reported the French financial daily La Tribune as quoting a Washington source as saying.