The unseemly succession row that has engulfed Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the Labour party prompted a friend in New York who does not normally follow British politics to write: "What the hell is going on over there? Are they going to have to drag Tony kicking and screaming out of there?"
Quite. The tug-of-war between Tony and Gordon hardly casts the British political system in the best possible light. Whether the prime minister is to blame for welching on previous promises or the chancellor for launching a naked power-grab, the issue of succession is bound to be fraught in the absence of clear rules.
It was messy under Margaret Thatcher, who left No 10 in tears, and it has turned into a political Punch and Judy show between the two current protagonists. Mr Blair duly felt compelled to apologise to the public, saying it was not Labour's "finest hour, to be frank." The row demeans both men and Labour may eventually pay a heavy political price at the polls as voters take fright at parties wracked by internecine conflict.
As Labour back-pedals from the abyss, Britain's political class may well want to look to the US for guidance. The 22nd amendment of the American constitution states that no one can be elected president more than twice in keeping with the US aversion to dictatorship.
Eight years in the White House and it's the lecture circuit, no ifs or buts. The precedent was established by George Washington, who refused to run for a third tem, and enshrined in the constitution in 1951. Only Franklin Roosevelt served more than two terms and died during his fourth.
Term limits have their limitations. A second-term president can quickly become a lame duck, his authority diminished as the political class is aware that he will not be around for that much longer.
Consequently it is very hard for second-term presidents to accomplish much that is worthwhile. But political weariness seems to set in regardless. The Blair government has been running on empty for a while now. Even without Iraq, a certain sapping of political energy would have set in. The Tories under John Major looked very tired and Mr Blair benefited hugely from the appetite for something fresh.
Some would say that two terms can unnecessarily truncate a successful political career. How many Americans would have voted for George Bush if Bill Clinton had been the alternative?
Yet, as a general rule, term limits do ensure an "orderly transition", the phrase bandied about so much by Labour party officials in the past few days and yet so far from the reality. If term limits were in place in the UK, Labour would have been spared a political quarrel that has turned them into a laughing stock. Term limits would also have spared Thatcher making an ignominious exit. But the idea will never catch on here. Americans tend to prefer clear-cut rules, the British like to muddle through.
