Although Blair wanted to be known as the Churchill of modern times for standing up to his "enemies," his legacy will be compared with that of Prime Minister Anthony Eden who had to go because his botched foreign policy led to the Suez crisis in 1956. Misjudgment of the situation in the Middle East tarnished both, Eden and Blair, as prime ministers.

But there is a difference between 1956 and 2006. In 1956, the US did not support the British policy of invading Egypt, while in 2003 the British unhesitatingly backed the US policy of invading Iraq and continued to totally support flawed US policies in Afghanistan, Israel and in the worldwide struggle against terrorism and militant jihadists. That is why Blair has been unkindly called "Bush's poodle."

The worrying fact for President Bush is that Blair had to go because of the mounting anger of the British public for his backing of US policies on the war on terrorism. Blair's popularity fell to an unprecedented level (31% per cent), while the opposition conservatives rose to 40% per cent. Blair has become a political liability for the Labour Party.

Against this background, the departure of Blair will have an impact on Anglo-American alliance, especially on President Bush. Bush has become used to Blair's total support for what he did, and does, in foreign affairs. Blair did not ask any questions and blindly followed Bush's policy. The latest example was the Lebanon-Israel crisis. Neither the US or Britain intervened until Israel was placed in an awkward situation in its war with Hezbollah.

Blair and Bush are conservative in their personal and political approach. Although Blair invented "New Labour," he followed Thatcher's policy and departed from traditional Labour policies. Under the guise of "New Labour," he introduced policies almost similar to those espoused by Thatcher.

In addition, both Blair and Bush are deeply religious "born again Christians." It is reported that Blair carries a copy of the Bible with him wherever he goes, and President Bush begins his cabinet meetings with a prayer. Blair's personal chemistry fits with that of Bush.

Both also believe in the use of military power to resolve political issues, and that policy has landed them into a never-ending war in Iraq, with mounting casualties of British and US troops. They got sucked into an emotional and simplistic approach toward the Middle East.

They failed to clearly identify the enemies who are elusive in nature, and non-state actors. Both thought that the invasion of Iraq would lead to democratization of Iraq which would radiate to other Middle East countries. Both misjudged the society and the nationalistic character of Arabs. They compared Arab society with those of Germany and Japan which, after the Second World War, the US re-modeled according to its own desires.

The next prime minister of Britain is expected to be Gordon Brown, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He is known to have a brilliant academic record and, like every intellectual, he is likely to be more analytical and calculating than Blair in his approach towards US policies.

Although he reportedly likes America for its economic success, and spends his vacations in the US, he is likely to distance himself from the US policies on the war on terrorism for domestic political reasons. It is reported that in a poll in mid-August, more than 8 out of 10 Britons wanted a split from the US policy on war on terrorism because they thought that war fuelled terrorism, and that the Iraqi invasion was unwarranted. No prime minister can but heed public opinion.

The special relationship between Britain and the US began from the Second World War. Churchill and Roosevelt became good friends. Both are English-speaking countries and their relationship is firmly rooted in a common history and culture (e.g. Churchill's mother was an American).

The likelihood of revision of policy with the US does not mean that their special relationship will end. They belong to G-8 and pursue economic policies to achieve the same goal.

It is noted that the invasion of Iraq has no legitimacy under international law, and thus distanced rule-based European Union from the US and Britain. Observers suggest that Britain, under a new prime minister, may align itself with the European Union in coordinating its policy on the war on terrorism, thus the Bush administration may lose crucial support from Britain.

Barrister Harun ur Rashid is a former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.