This morning’s NY Times has a good piece about the continuing British disentanglement from Mr Bu$h’s ego-war. They have turned over three of their four-province area of responsibility to indigenous (Shiite) Iraqi forces, and turned over much of Basra, as well. They maintain an operational toehold at the Basra airbase, with about 5,000 troops.

LONDON, Oct. 8 — Prime Minister Gordon Brown told the House of Commons on Monday that he would remove half of the 5,000 British troops in Iraq by next spring, and left open the strong possibility that all British soldiers would leave Iraq by the end of 2008.

Mr. Brown said the cuts were possible because of what he described as the progress made in training Iraqi security forces. He described the situation in Basra in southern Iraq, where the British troops are based, as “calmer.”

Since President Bush has made clear that American troops will remain heavily committed in Iraq at least through his administration’s end in January 2009, it appears that the tight alliance on Iraq forged between Mr. Brown’s predecessor, Tony Blair, and Washington is fraying. Indeed, a hallmark of Mr. Brown’s three months as prime minister has been the relative distance he has established with the American president.

There are differing opinions about the state of life in the south. The British say that conditions are stable, while MNF-I and CENTCOM insist that the situation is desperate, and many officers accuse our allies of cowardice, treason, or something like that. Indeed, when the British withdrew from Basra Palace some US military assumed public attitudes that some have described as “petulant.”

About a week ago, Gordon Brown announced that he would be cutting the British presence in Iraq to 5000. The White House responded predictably - that is to say - petulantly. A Bush aid announced that Britain was no longer Bush's greatest ally, and then slandered the British forces. “Operationally, British forces have performed poorly in Basra,” said the official. “Maybe it’s best that they leave. Now we will have a clear field in southern Iraq.”

A cynical man might think that some Bu$h malAdministration aides in particular are also in a snit because when a group of Royal Navy and Marines were seized by elements of the Iranian Navy earlier this year for trespassing in Iranian territorial waters they didn’t offer armed resistance and get shot down, thereby causing an incident which would have given Mr Cheney his woodie, and a chance to bomb Iran. It’s terribly disloyal of an ally to not die in furtherance of American imperialism.

The timetable of reductions appears to fit neatly into the calculus of a British general election that is now expected to be held in 2009. Britain’s role as America’s largest military partner has been highly unpopular among voters, and as Mr. Brown spoke, thousands of protesters gathered outside Parliament chanting slogans calling for immediate withdrawal.

Gosh, Prime Minister Brown playing politics just like the “senior partner” Mr Bu$h? It gets better:

Mr. Brown visited British troops stationed at their base outside Basra last week, and announced then that 1,000 troops would be going home.

But that declaration, apparently aimed at a possible general election next month, backfired after Mr. Brown was accused of playing politics. It also turned out that some of the troops he described as being withdrawn were already home, and others had already been announced as heading back.

Now that tactic is very familiar, but unlike the US, the British public will be quick to call “bullshit” on Mr Brown. They have a famously free press over there, unlike in the States, where the media will perhaps lightly criticize Republicans, but will savage Democratic Party politicians and presidents.

On the sharp, pointy end of this decision is the problem that the US will now have to start supplying its own convoy guards, including reaction forces, since the British Army will not be mission-capable. Fortunately, we have some of the toughest killers in the Middle East available to protect our convoys.

As Bernhard has pointed out, we also have a supply route to take some of the load off MSR Tampa. This will work super-duper, as long as the Anbar tribes stay bought-off. This route is the 21st century version of the route Lawrence of Arabia suggested be used to supply the Arab forces allied with HM Government during WWI.