Blair in the Hot Seat
(CBS)
Only 20 months after a sweeping reelection victory, British Prime Minister Tony Blair's popularity is eroding amid public opposition to a possible war against Iraq.
A poll published in Tuesday's edition of the Times of London shows that by a margin of two to one, Britons are not convinced by the U.S.-British case for attacking Saddam Hussein.
U.S. officials say they decided to seek a March 17 deadline for Iraq — rather than an immediate go-ahead for military action — mainly to give Blair political cover.
Polls show that Britons are much more likely to back a war with United Nations approval; 52 percent support war under those circumstances, according to the Times.
The U.S. and Britain hoped that providing a deadline would make it easier to get that approval; now, Britain is apparently proposing an extended deadline.
But it is not clear that Britain's drive for compromise will win votes in the Security Council or stem the growing resistance to Blair's policy in the British public.
That could spell trouble for Blair.
While some polls also show that President Bush's ratings have slipped in recent months, the ebbing support is more worrying for Blair because of the structure and history of British government.
Under Britain's parliamentary system, Blair is not directly elected but holds power because his Labor Party, which has a majority in the House of Commons, elects him leader.
It can also vote him to remove him. There is no indication that Blair's demise is imminent, but hints of serious trouble abound.
Last month, between 750,000 and a million people marched through London to oppose the war. In a country of nearly 60 million people, that is a tiny minority. But as the largest demonstration since the Vietnam War, it indicated not only that opposition was fairly widespread, but also that Blair's critics are active and have the ability to mobilize.
Shortly thereafter, parliament voted on a measure backing Blair's approach to the Iraq crisis. The resolution passed easily, but 121 members of Blair's own party voted against him. That number of Labor "No's" was higher than anticipated, and British observers said it represented the largest revolt against a sitting prime minister by his own party in recent history.
This week, MP Tom Dalyell said some local Labor Party organizations — which form the party's base — are ready to draft resolutions calling on Blair to resign if he orders British troops to fight a war without U.N. backing.
None of these developments could be called a groundswell. On the face of it, none are very surprising, for Blair's relationship with his party's left wing has always been one of convenience rather than warmth.
Blair, a labor lawyer by trade, rose within the Labor Party ranks as a modernizer — part of the faction that hoped to revamp an organization associated with militant unionism and nationalized industry.
He made his mark by attacking sacred cows of the party's hard left. His lasting effect on the party structure could be the elimination of Clause Four, the passage in the Labor manifesto that advocated a society where the means of production are controlled by the workers. Blair dubbed the clause "Trotskyist."
Since taking office after Labor defeated John Major's Conservatives in 1997, Blair's approach has mirrored that of President Clinton; they even shared some electoral advisers.
Blair pushed for a New Labor similar to Mr. Clinton's New Democrats: While continuing to call himself a "socialist," he pushed for private involvement in the public sector, trimmed welfare rolls and pledged a tough fight against crime.
His stances have earned him the ire of the liberal "back-benchers" (so called because they are relegated to the rear tiers of the House of Commons). These included Tony Benn, the former liberal parliamentarian who interviewed Saddam Hussein earlier this year.
But until recently, the left's grumbling was suppressed by Blair's success. His youthful vigor and ability to blend social liberalism with fiscal conservatism and a pro-business attitude strengthened Labor and plunged the opposition Conservatives into a leadership crisis after the 2001 elections, when Blair was returned to power by a comfortable margin.
However, even before the situation in Iraq reached the eleventh hour, there were signs of trouble for Blair.
Last year there were scandals involving his wife's relationship to a con man and the government's advocacy on behalf of a wealthy businessman donor.
Strikes of teachers, subway operators and firefighters evoked memories of the labor strife of 1979 — dubbed the "Winter of Discontent" — which destroyed the government of Labor Prime Minister James Callaghan and ushered in the era of Margaret Thatcher.
But now, the revolt against the possible war means Blair faces a threat not only to his popularity, but also his legacy, if not his tenure.
There are no term limits for prime ministers, and Blair has never indicated whether he would seek a third stint in office. Under British law, he must call an election within five years of the last one — or by the summer of 2006 — but he can call one at any time.
The long-standing rumor in Britain is that Blair secretly agreed to step down after two terms to allow his chancellor or treasury secretary, Gordon Brown, to take the reigns. Blair and Brown were both rising stars in Labor's modernizing wing when Brown threw his support to Blair, allowing him to take control.
It is believed that Blair hopes to secure his legacy by pushing Britain to drop the pound and adopt the Euro. For the modernizing and iconoclastic prime minister, this would be the ultimate signal that Britain had outgrown its long-held suspicion of all things continental.
A vote is expected sometime next fall, but it was never considered a sure thing and could be even trickier given the fervor of public opposition to Blair because of the war.
Blair could delay the vote until later in his term, or even seek a third term, as Thatcher did. But Thatcher's experience holds yet another warning sign for Blair. Three years after her final election triumph, her own party dumped her in 1990, mainly over her support for a new poll tax.
Like the looming war, it sparked widespread opposition and massive protests.
By Jarrett Murphy©MMIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. |
