Camp David: What's changed?
That is the question that both the president and the PM knew would hang over this summit. George Bush answered it in a way that was designed to flatter his visitor (watch the news conference here), calling Gordon Brown a principled problem solver who understands the threat of terrorism, and describing him as a humorous Scotsman - not the awkward dour one that he'd been told about.
What was striking was that Mr Brown, while talking warmly about the shared history and shared values of the two countries, did nothing to return those personal compliments. He even referred to their meetings as full and frank - which is normal diplomatic code for an argument.
The signs though are that that difference in language reflects simply differing political calculations by both men. Gordon Brown wants to show his distance from George Bush, whereas the president wants to prove that the alliance with Britain remains strong, even after Tony Blair's departure.
On the substance, both men declared that they were at one on the battle against terror. Gordon Brown signalled that he'd make no announcement on the pullback of UK troops from Basra until after the publication in September of a report on the impact of America's troop surge.
For now, then, Britain and America's policies on Iraq are in step. After the autumn though, Gordon Brown has left his host, and voters at home, still guessing.
UPDATE 09:00 PM: If you watched the news conference, you may have noticed Mr Bush's warm greeting to me... He said to me, clearly remembering our last encounter, "you still hanging around?".
At a news conference in Washington last year, the day after the Iraq study group report was published, I suggested that his response would lead some to believe that he was in 'denial' about Iraq.
At the end of today's briefing, the president looked at me, sweating in the swampy conditions, and said, "next time you should cover your bald head". I made the fatal error of answering a quip with a quip: "I didn't know you cared". To which the president said, quick as a flash, "I don't". No Christmas card for me from Washington, then.
PS: You might be interested in article about that previous incident.
Camp David: The hacks here are divided about whether to call this the 'roast beef summit' (after the food served to the president and prime minister) or the 'golf buggy' summit (after the vehicle Mr Bush took Mr Brown out for a spin in, producing a look on the PM's face that said 'this wasn't in the script'!).
The two men met alone first for dinner last night, then again for breakfast this morning. Next they move on to talks with fellow ministers and officials, followed by a wind-up lunch of what are being described as the best cheeseburgers in America.
Beyond all the eating, and the schmoosing, there is real business being done. (registration required) has caught many eyes. In it he acknowledges, "the debt the world owes to the United States for its leadership" in the struggle against terrorism. He goes on to declare that these are, "shared tasks to expose terrorism for what it is - not a cause but a crime - a crime against humanity".
Mr Brown, it seems to me, is trying to recast the whole war on terror. I understand that he is preparing a speech on the "cold-war-style battle of ideas" which he believes is now necessary. He has carefully studied a book about the CIA's role in fighting the "cultural cold war" entitled "".
I believe - and we will soon find out at their joint news conference - that Mr Brown will have given Mr Bush the assurances he wants about the UK's role in Iraq but he will have urged the president to fight a much wider campaign against terrorism - in part by showing that Britain and America can end wars and combat poverty in the third world.
There'll be no Colgate moment, no movie with the wives, no chinos that are - in the words of the British Ambassador at the time - "ball crushingly tight". This first Camp David summit between Prime Minister and President will not, must not, be the same as the last first summit.
Do not, however, make the mistake of thinking - or, even of hoping - that there will be a chill in the Maryland air simply because George's close friend Tony has gone and Gordon has arrived in his place.
Some predicted just that after Bill Clinton - a more natural political ally for Tony Blair - left the political stage and George Bush stepped on to it. People have been predicting as much again and again over the decades. Again and again, though, the occupants of Downing Street have followed the same approach to the President - whoever the holder of that office is. They "hug them close". Why? Not just because of the shared history and the values which Gordon Brown waxed lyrical about on his way here but also because Prime Ministers need Presidents to get done the things they want to get done and Presidents have, over the years, found British Prime Ministers can be pretty useful too.
For their own different reasons Brown and Bush have a shared interest in making this summit a success. Gordon Brown - who has spoken endlessly of change since coming to office - knows that Iraq is one area where change cannot be delivered quickly. He did not enter Number 10 carrying a secret plan marked "withdrawal". He's aware that simply changing the mood music will not satisfy those who demand more change than simply donning suits and ties. He wants, above all, to change the trans-Atlantic agenda - to move beyond Iraq. George Bush - under enormous political pressure at home - needs to ensure that his voters cannot say that now even the Brits are deserting him. He will know what it is that his visitor needs to go home happy and he will want to deliver it.
Key to that is a war - not the one which Britain and America started but one which they hope to help stop - the war in Darfur. Both men are backing a UN resolution this week which will not merely establish a 19,000 strong peacekeeping force in Darfur and will not only back a peace process between the warring factions but will also offer Sudan a package of long term economic support if it agrees to co-operate - a carrot to accompany the sanctions stick.
For Gordon Brown this would prove that something can be done to tackle what he calls the greatest humanitarian crisis the world faces. For George Bush it would prove that America is willing to act on the world stage to build and not just to destroy.
Behind the scenes, of course, the two men will talk of THAT other war - the one which Gordon Brown failed to mention in the lengthy statement issued as he travelled to America. They will talk about the problems of remaining and, perhaps the even greater problems, of withdrawing. What they agree - or even disagree - about is unlikely to emerge for some time to come.
This summit, you see, has to be a success. Not the backslapping, gag cracking, occasionally wince-inducing kind of summit success we've grown used to. This - as Downing Street has made clear - is NOT that kind of summit. But it will be a success nonethless since George and Gordon wouldn't have it any other way.
