The talks between Tony Blair and Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, in Berlin yesterday confirm that there is the strong basis for a close working relationship between them as leaders and for intimate ties between Britain and Germany within the EU and on the international stage. That Mr Blair may find Frau Merkel a more congenial and reliable individual than Gerhard Schröder, his supposed comrade within the wider ranks of social democrats, may be ironic but it is not surprising. Mr Blair has found that allies are best made on a pragmatic and not a partisan basis. It is a lesson that his successor(s) will do well to bear in mind.

Much of the success of these discussions should be awarded to the new German Chancellor. The “grand coalition” that she was obliged to form with the SPD was not of her choosing. She would have much preferred to do business with the pro-market Free Democrats. At the outset of her tenure, it appeared as if she would have been better counselled to seek another general election rather than enter an alliance of inconvenience. To her immense credit she has showed that her instincts were right and that it would be worth the risk of this coalition. The toughest challenges at home are yet to come, but she has shown her mettle.

That is true in the realm of foreign policy as well. She made it clear yesterday that Germany, like Britain, would not want to see Iran obtain a nuclear arsenal. With unambiguous language, which would not have passed the lips of the slippery Herr Schröder, she has made it plain that if and when this question arrives at the UN Security Council, doing nothing will not be an option. If Tehran really only aspires to civil nuclear power, then it will recognise the emerging consensus on this matter and behave more rationally.

For London and Berlin are hardly alone in their assessment. France, which under Jacques Chirac, in particular, has seemed to take pride in placing itself on the opposite side from Washington on big global controversies, is, in rhetorical terms at least, forming an advanced guard for action.

Indeed, the words offered by Phillipe Douste-Blazy, the French Foreign Minister, this week went well beyond anything asserted by George W. Bush and his Administration. There was, he stated, “a clandestine Iranian military nuclear programme”. The sole acceptable course now would be for the Government in Tehran to “suspend all nuclear activity and the enrichment of uranium and the conversion of uranium”. His forceful edict follows the recent observation by M Chirac that the French independent nuclear deterrent — the force de frappe — exists in part to let rogue states know that the “ultimate warning” was always there to disable those who constitute a dire threat to international stability.

Events are unlikely to proceed in such a drastic fashion. Yet it remains true that despite profound differences about Iraq, policy towards Iran is showing signs of converging. Recent experience has indicated to the US that there are limits to the extent that military force can be used to disarm dangerous nations. Experience has perhaps begun to persuade certain European states that the comfort blanket of “diplomatic solutions” cannot be employed to extinguish every emerging fire.

Mr Blair opined yesterday that he saw Britain’s links with Germany as an “alliance and friendship I hope, not a rivalry”. The shared values run far deeper than any differing opinions.