On the other hand, Lawrence Lindsey, the new President’s economic adviser, is said in private to be brutally dismissive of what he sees as the protectionism and lack of entrepreneurial dynamism in the European economies. That need not itself be any obstacle to an Anglo-American axis on trade. But to the extent that a premiss of Mr Blair’s pro-Europeanism is that the Continental economies are beginning to change for the better, it could suggest a sharp difference. Especially as some in the Bush administration appear to be more interested in freeing up trade with South America than looking to Europe.The much more radioactive sensitivities, however, lie in defence and security. In the worst-case scenario, drawn in lurid primary colours by the Tory opposition, the Blair government now faces two complementary – and intractable – choices between the US and Europe. If, as is beginning to look increasingly likely, it backs Bush’s plans for National Missile Defence (NMD) against ballistic missiles targeted on the US by rogue states, it infuriates the Europeans. If it continues to back the European Defence Initiative – even likelier since Mr Blair is a principal architect – it infuriates the Americans.You don’t have to underestimate the problem, however, to see that it may just contain the seeds of its own solution.

Put crudely, we may be looking at the basis of a trade-off.The reservations sounded in Munich at the weekend by Donald Rumsfield, the new US Defence Secretary, about EU plans for a 60,000-strong Rapid Reaction Force, reflect an important strain of opinion in Washington. What’s more, some French-influenced wording in the Nice Treaty implies a greater degree of EU willingness to go it alone without Nato than the British want.On the other hand, Mr Cook will be able to give General Powell some important assurances today. Such as that the principle that Nato should be given first refusal in any EU operation is enshrined in the Washington 1999 Nato agreement. Any European-only operation will require unanimous assent, not least by the EU members of Nato, including Britain No country will be obliged to take part even then.

And that there will be no EU military planners – as opposed to the advisory staff that France wants to build up.This may reinforce another faction in Washington, which sees some cold logic in an Initiative that has already begun to stimulate an increase in European defence spending. This makes all the more sense if the Americans are to reduce their own troop commitments in regions such as the Balkans.Particularly – and here’s the rub – if the Europeans start to show a somewhat more emollient attitude to NMD Even in Britain, this could be very difficult. OK, it may be that the tracking facilities needed in Europe do not require additions to Fylingdales, set in Yorkshire National Park. And maybe there is a chance that the Russians can eventually be brought round to a system with large reach that could actually be in her own interests.