John Rapley

LONDON:

I spent Tuesday evening in what must be the world's most charmless building, Miami International Airport. Waiting for my connection to Heathrow - well, that may be the world's second-most charmless building - I spent plenty of time waiting in immigration and security line-ups. It's as strong a reminder as any that America is at war, and obsessed with its security.

Not that things were any more reassuring in London. The security alert here is at a level which suggests a terrorist attack is highly likely. It's been that way for months. London's starting to get the feel of the worst years of the IRA campaign, when one just grew accustomed to scanning the cars on the underground for abandoned packages.

Are they winning their war on terror? A recent report by a London think-tank suggests that Tony Blair got nothing in return for his steadfast commitment to U.S. President George W. Bush in the Iraq campaign. Mr. Blair had hoped to have a moderating impact on the Americans, but in the end he got little more than kind words.

Are they winning?

As for the Americans, they continue to take the war to their foes, whoever they consider them to be, as evidenced by this week's bombing in Somalia. But are they winning? The tragi-comic execution of Saddam Hussein seems to show that the new Iraqi government, far from being a loyal American ally, will happily thumb its nose at Washington.

In America, polls suggest that ever more people consider the war a failure. The new Democratic Congress seems to want to frustrate President Bush's desire to expand the military campaign. But will the Democrats flex their muscle as 2008 approaches? Election-year caution may yet take over.

All the talk now, of course, is of the upcoming presidential election. Mr. Bush can't run, of course, given term limits. But that won't stop the war from being a key issue. And the interest at the moment is on the Democratic side.

Several candidates are expected to emerge soon, but two are grabbing the media spotlight. These are Hilary Clinton and Barak Obama. It is growing increasingly obvious that Mrs. Clinton is giving an election run serious consideration. And most analysts now suggest that her chief competition will come from her charismatic young colleague in the Senate.

Clinton strategists apparently consider Mr. Obama their chief threat, though they also seem bemused by his striking media power. Their expectation seems to be that his fire will burn out. As an unknown quantity, he will be subjected to ruthless media attention, and the spark may fizzle.

Not enough to elect her

But being well known will hardly benefit Mrs. Clinton. Most Ameri-cans have already formed an opinion of her, and the polls repeatedly suggest that not enough of them like her to elect her president.

Nevertheless, if Mrs. Clinton and her husband decide they want to move back into the White House, they have the wherewithal in the party to have their way. They have already begun efforts to undermine the faction behind party chairman Howard Dean, who remains a thorn in their side. And they have begun sending their allies into the field to quietly demonise potential rivals.

And if Mr. Obama doesn't fizzle, and instead decides to run? If they have to, the Clintons can play dirty. They might even play the race card, in a strange way. Mr. Clinton retains strong allies in the black caucus, which could be moved by suggestions that Mr. Barak is not really an African-American, and indeed represents a threat to their interests.

It could all get very interesting. And at least it will provide a diversion from this depressing war.