Bush tries to build bridges to Europe

Washington has been angered by the EU’s plan to lift its embargo on arms sales to China and also wants to put a lid on plans to turn Nato into an extension of any future EU foreign policy.

The US treats sceptically European claims that a new code of conduct governing the sale of military equipment to China will neither increase the quality nor the quantity of defence-related exports to Beijing.

The president’s new national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, said: "The president has real concerns about it. He will share those concerns with the Europeans. They will, obviously, have an opportunity to express their views. And he will listen."

Ellen Bork, deputy director of the Project for a New American Century, said: "America’s position on why the EU ban should not be lifted comes down to three substantive issues: human rights, the threat against Taiwan and proliferation concerns. Any one of these concerns justifies maintaining the embargo."

Tomorrow, Bush’s first day of his tour will be taken up by a meeting at Nato and the EU followed by dinner with his harshest critic in Europe, President Jacques Chirac of France.

On the eve of the trip Bush acknowledged that he and Chirac have had differences, but added: "Now’s the time to set those aside."

On Tuesday he will have breakfast with Tony Blair and a meeting with Ukrainian President Victor Yushchenko before travelling on to Germany and Slovakia, where he will hold a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

But in an interview with European journalists at the White House, Bush rejected calls by German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder for Nato to be revamped ahead of European integration of foreign policy. Bush said: "I disagree [with changes]. I think Nato is vital. Nato is a very important relationship as far as the US is concerned.

"Some have said we must have a unified Europe to balance America. Whey, when in fact we share values and goals?"

The president also acknowledged that the time of the unilateralism of his first term had come to an end and the US could not "spread freedom" alone.

European moves towards lifting the China arms embargo have already prompted the US Congress to pass a resolution arguing that any decision to end the embargo is inconsistent with transatlantic co-operation on defence matters. "I think Congress will act" says Daniel Blumenthal, who until recently covered China in the Secretary of Defence’s Office for International Security Affairs.

"The United States was caught off-guard, and I think, was very surprised about European attitudes towards China, and then Europe was taken aback by the response by the United States."

The US fears that military technology sold by Europe to China could end up being used against American forces in the Taiwan Strait in the event of a Chinese invasion of the island.

Richard Fisher, a military expert at the International Assessment and Strategy Centre, said: "I would view a decision to lift the embargo as nothing short of a strategic back-stab. It really has to be viewed in these stark terms.

"There is a real possibility of war on the Taiwan Strait. And the lifting of the embargo cannot be read in Beijing other than as a legitimisation of its goals."

The US has not always helped its own cause. "The Bush Administration has really confined its arguments too much to diplomatic channels and needs to reach out to public opinion much more," said Bork.

Many Washington experts also see the deepening relationship between Brussels and Beijing not only in trade terms but also as part of both capitals’ long-term geopolitical ambitions.

David Shambaugh, a China expert at the independent Brookings Institution in Washington, said : "There’s a convergence of views about the norms of international relations - multilateralism, international law, regimes, multi-polarity, and I daresay a need to constrain American unipolar and hegemonic behaviour."

He noted that "it was no accident that [Chinese] Premier Wen Jiabao was the first foreign visitor to Brussels" last year after the EU expanded from 15 to 25 members.

Despite this, Hadley said: "[Bush’s visit] will be an opportunity for him to communicate directly with the people of Europe, and will show America’s desire to work in partnership with Europe, based on common values, to advance the cause of freedom."

Last week, Bush admitted that he suspected many Europeans believe he cares only for America’s own security, and this week’s trip will, in part, be a public relations exercise to demonstrate that this is not the case.

Danielle Pletka, a foreign policy specialist at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, argued: "Washington’s table manners appear to have improved. Gratuitous jibes have been replaced by diplomatic niceties."

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos last month, Blair argued: "If America wants the rest of the world to be part of the agenda it has set, it must be part of their agenda too."

Bush arrives in Europe emboldened by his own re-election last November and the success of the Iraqi elections last month. The former forced European governments to accept that they would have to find some sort of accommodation with a president granted another four years in office, while the latter allowed all parties to draw a line under past disagreements and accept that progress in Iraq was possible and the mission there could not be allowed to fail.

Although Iraq will feature in the discussions, the president has with Nato and the EU, for the first time in nearly three years it will not overshadow every other issue. Iraq may offer a greater opportunity for a united front than other areas.

The president will only go so far in his efforts to respect tender European sensibilities, however. Although he will hold a round-table discussion with ordinary Germans on Wednesday, most of his public appearances will be devoted to reaffirming and building upon the message of his inauguration and State of the Union speeches, that freedom and the advance of democracy into the darkest corners of the globe are the only long-term guarantees of peace and stability.

Some American observers believe this is a message that Europe still does not wish to hear. Arizona Senator John McCain returned from the annual Munich conference on security policy complaining that Europe still couldn’t seem to appreciate the US position, let alone support it.

"They haven’t budged one inch that I could see. Not on Iran, not on Iraq, not on arms sales to China," he said.

McCain fears a return to a "century-old clash between Wilsonian principles and European realpolitik".