January 23, 2003	Thursday	Ziqa’ad 19, 1423

LONDON: Tony Blair says he “totally understands” why British public opinion is skeptical on Iraq — but it is far from clear that he does. His role in recent months, he told a parliamentary committee on Tuesday, has been to build “the broadest possible international consensus” on disarming Saddam Hussein. The prime minister acknowledges the risk of short-term unpopularity. But he believes he can win over the doubters in the event of war. He predicts that the public will rally round if, in his final judgment, there is no other way.

As has been noted here before, Mr Blair’s confidence in his powers of persuasion is impressive. But on Iraq policy at least, it is not borne out by the facts. As the Guardian’s ICM tracking poll shows, opposition to war in Iraq is rising, not falling. Since Mr Blair’s dossier on Iraq’s estimated weapons of mass destruction capability was published last September, opposition has increased by 10 points, to 47 per cent (with 30 per cent in support). This trend, indicative of a deeply divided nation, has accelerated of late despite unremitting US-British tub-thumping. Other polls confirm that more than 80 per cent want, at the very least, incontrovertible evidence of an Iraqi threat and specific UN authorisation. Nor do most people appear to accept, as a cause for war, the government’s linking of notional terrorist attacks here, the worldwide WMD proliferation problem, and Iraq. In other words, Mr Blair has so far failed to make the case.

Mr Blair’s international consensus-building has been equally unsuccessful if last weekend’s worldwide, well-supported anti-war demonstrations are any guide. For every person protesting on the streets of Tokyo, Islamabad, Cairo, Damascus, Moscow, London, Washington and elsewhere, there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of others who share their worries. The momentum of these demonstrations is certain to build in the coming weeks. Consensus is also proving elusive among Britain’s traditional allies. The widely distrusted George Bush is a particular handicap in Europe; a majority of Germans, for example, finds him more frightening than Saddam. But it is an overall impression of unheeding US bellicosity that has led 76 per cent of Germans to oppose even a UN-approved war, according to one poll, while 75 per cent of French people think their government should use its UN veto. Spain and Italy, which Mr Blair said on Tuesday were supportive of the British position, currently show anti-war majorities of over 60 per cent that may yet modify their governments’ behaviour.

This battle for public opinion differs from other eras in several respects. Generally speaking, people are better informed, more connected, more autonomous, much more critical of the political process, and less inclined to accept at face value their leaders’ judgments. As a result, modern public opinion, one aspect of a globalised community, is less easily led or manipulated. The public increasingly demands its voice be heard, and contrary views genuinely considered, before decisions are made in its name. War is not inevitable; but neither, if war comes, is public support for it.

That is one powerful reason why the British parliament must be allowed a vote before any military action is launched. It is also a reason why Mr Blair should consider what for him may be a novel idea. This is not a problem of communications, of getting the message across, as thwarted politicians often condescendingly assume. Rather, it appears that most people, here and abroad, have indeed heard, understood and pondered his arguments — and reject them. It may be, instructively, that they are right and Mr Blair is wrong.—Dawn/The Guardian News Service