1
   

UK Poll: British to close to USA/Israel overreacted

 
 
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 11:34 pm
Quote:
Exclusive ICM poll 63% say PM has tied Britain too close to White House
Julian Glover Ewen MacAskill

Britain should take a much more robust and independent approach to the United States, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today, which finds strong public opposition to Tony Blair's close working relationship with President Bush.


http://i7.tinypic.com/20v10ue.jpg
...
Just 30% think the prime minister has got the relationship about right, against 63% saying he has tied Britain too closely to the US.
...
Even a majority of Labour supporters ?- traditionally more supportive of Mr Blair's foreign policy position ?- think he has misjudged the relationship, with 54% saying Britain is too close to the US. Conservatives ?- 68% ?- and Liberal Democrats ?- 83% ?- are even more critical.
...
Although a solid core of Labour supporters ?- 48% ?- still think the war was justified, overall only 36% of voters agree ?- a seven-point drop since the Guardian last asked the question in October 2004.

Older voters, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and people living in the south are particularly critical, suggesting the anti-war movement has a base of support well beyond student groups and the left.

Support for the war reached 63% in April 2003, in the wake of early military success. Now a narrow majority of voters ?- 51% ?- believe it was unjustified, the highest proportion for more than two years.
...
http://i7.tinypic.com/20v16vb.jpg
...
They are more concerned by the role of British forces in Iraq than Afghanistan, with 36% saying their presence is making the situation worse in Iraq against 29% who think this is true of Britain's more recent deployment in southern Afghanistan.

But both findings outweigh the proportion of voters who think British troops are improving the situation on the ground: just 19% of all those questioned think they are making progress in Iraq and 23% think this is the case in Afghanistan. Around a third of voters think that at best British forces are making no difference one way or the other in the two countries.

There is also minimal public appetite for fresh foreign policy commitments, such as a multinational force in Lebanon. An overwhelming proportion of voters think current deployments are already overstretching Britain's military resources: 69% agree; 19% do not.

Conservatives ?- 78% of whom believe the armed forces are overstretched ?- are especially concerned, despite David Cameron's support for an interventionist policy, symbolised by his visit to troops in Kandahar yesterday. • ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1,001 adults over 18 by telephone on July 21-23. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.

Source: The Guardian, 25.07.2006, pages 1 & 2

Online: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,,1828225,00.html
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 608 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 12:11 am
Looks sane to me.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 12:45 am
From the Leader in today's Guardian:
Quote:
... The perception that our government has set British and European interests aside in order to stay in the slipstream of the US administration is in certain respects a caricature - as the robustly supportive attitude of Downing Street towards the strong statements of the foreign office minister Kim Howells indicates. But the caricature contains enough truth to further weaken British interests abroad and to further damage the government's already weakened standing at home.

It is indeed a global and an American tragedy of our era that the Bush administration is so rarely willing to engage wholeheartedly with international issues and crises, including in the Middle East, except on its own terms. The answer to that tragedy is certainly not to play to the international anti-American gallery as some would prefer. But Britain garners little respect and sustains enormous damage from pretending that the uniquely difficult character of the Bush administration somehow does not matter. Ministers do not deceive us by this pretence and they should not deceive themselves either. If they are not prepared to face up to the domestic and international consequences this time, it will be clear that they have learned nothing from the Iraq war. ...

source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1828147,00.html
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 06:00 am
The common response I have had in speaking to brits over the last three years when I've inquired as to their perception of why Blair has chosen to follow the policies we all know, has been a slow head shaking, a furrowed brow and a rather sad, "I don't know".

All of which suggests to me that we need a few more Downing Street memos to emerge into the light.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 06:08 am
I'm so disgusted with things, I doubt 5 more Downing St memos would serve to shake the sleeping majority to action against this evil dunce of a president.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 07:11 am
snood

I meant that in order to understand the actual forces which led Blair to take the position he took - which even Brits themselves were against and which they seem to have no further clue as to 'why?' Blair took such a position - we'll need more information on the behind-scenes discussions.

It really isn't even clear why the US headed into Iraq. There are lots of clues and well-argued/documented theories, but it still remains unclear (look at the variety of opinions on why even within the community of very smart foreign policy analysts and specialists).

Partly, that seems to be because there was no single motive or rationale. But equally or more critical in this confusion and uncertainty is, I think, purposeful secrecy and attendent distraction tricks.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » UK Poll: British to close to USA/Israel overreacted
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/09/2026 at 09:15:18