The London School of Economics and Political Science More Spinn’d Against than Spinning?: Public Opinion, Political Communication, and Britain’s Involvement in the 2003 Invasion of Iraq James Strong A thesis submitted to the Department of International Relations of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, June 2012. 1 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 100,000 words. James Strong Department of International Relations London School of Economics and Political Science 2 Abstract When Tony Blair took Britain to war in Iraq in 2003, he overruled vociferous opposition from both the wider public and members of his own governing party. Public opinion was exercised by the issue on a vast scale. Over one million marched in London against the war. Opinion polls uniformly showed majority opposition to the use of force. Newspapers, the engine of media debate in this country, mostly attacked the government line, and encouraged their readers to protest or even, in one case, to rebel. The story of Iraq, however, is not simply one of an ideological or misguided premier dragging the entire nation to battle against its will. It is not simply one of ‘spin’, dossiers, Alastair Campbell, and Weapons of Mass Destruction. Much of the debate, and much of the hostility it generated, focused on areas that foreign policy analysts would consider peripheral; the domestic political consequences of war, the role of ‘spin doctors’ in the assessment of intelligence, and the question of whether the Prime Minister’s (successful) efforts to build a strong alliance with the world’s last superpower had transformed him into the President’s ‘poodle’. Interactions between ministers and the media were conditioned on both sides by an intimidating array of structural pressures. Diplomatic and journalistic calculations often clashed, trapping the government in the middle of an immensely complex ‘multi-level game’. News management influenced substantive foreign policy just as policy influenced news management, and the media arguably affected both, albeit often indirectly. The substance and the communication of the decision to go to war proved to be inseparable, both in the course of decision-making, and in their later retrospective assessment. Public Opinion, broadly defined, had a significant impact on British foreign policy at this time. Crucially, however, this impact operated through political communication mechanisms usually ignored by FPA. 3 Table of Contents Title Page List of Figures 5 Chapter 1: In search of the Loch Ness Monster... 8 Chapter 2: Tough on terrorism, or tough on the causes of terrorism? September – 40 December 2001 Chapter 3: Don’t mention the war!: January – April 2002 76 Chapter 4: Selling the threat: April – September 2002 11 0 Chapter 5: Going the UN route: October 2002 – February 2003 147 Chapter 6: “We have to climb the m ountain of conflict ”: February – March 2003 18 3 Chapter 7: Consequences : March 2003 - present 22 1 Chapter 8: Implications 255 Bibliography 29 9 4 List of Figures Figure Description Page 1 Positions adopted by British MPs towards military action in Afghanistan, 66 September – December 2001. 2 Editorial positions adopted by leading UK newspapers towards military action 67 in Afghanistan, controlling for circulation, September – December 2001. 3 Editorial positions adopted by articles in leading UK newspapers towards 68 military action in Afghanistan, broken down by publication, September – December 2001. 4 Volume of commentary articles in UK newspapers relating to Afghanistan or 68 Iraq, September – December 2001. 5 Opinion poll data showing support for military action against Afghanistan, 69 September – December 2001. 6 Average editorial positions adopted by leading UK newspapers towards 106 military action in Iraq (1 = pro-war, 0 = neutral, -1 = anti-war), controlling for circulation, January - April 2002. 7 Editorial positions adopted by leading UK newspapers towards military action 106 in Iraq, broken down by publication, 1 January – 10 April 2002. 8 Opinion poll data showing support for military action against Iraq, October 107 2001 – March 2002. 9 Volume of commentary articles in UK newspapers relating to Iraq, January – 107 April 2002. 10 Basic two -dimensional factor analysis of British active public actors’ positions 108 towards war with Iraq between January and April 2002. 11 Front Page of the Evening Standard, 24 September 2002. 137 12 Opinion poll data showing support for military action against Iraq, October 140 2001 – September 2002. 13 Average editorial positions adopted by leading UK newspapers towards 142 military action in Iraq (1 = pro-war, 0 = neutral, -1 = anti-war), controlling for circulation, April - September 2002. 14 Proportional distribution of commentary articles in UK newspapers between 142 pro-war, anti-war, and neutral positions. 15 Volume of commentary articles in UK newspapers relating to Iraq, April – 143 September 2002. 5 Figure Description Page 16 Distribution of speeches by British MPs in debates on Iraq policy during 143 Summer 2002 between pro-war, anti-war, and neutral positions. 17 Basic two -dimensional factor analysis of British active public actors’ positions 144 towards war with Iraq between April and September 2002. 18 The ‘multi -level game’ played by the UK government by ‘going the UN route’ 149 with selected actors’ interests identified. 19 Volume of commentary articles in UK newspapers relating to Iraq, October 176 2002 – February 2003. 20 Opinion poll data showing support for military action against Iraq, 1 October 177 2002 – 15 February 2003. 21 Average editorial positions adopted by leading UK newspapers towards 17 7 military action in Iraq, controlling for circulation, October 2002 – February 2003. 22 Average proportional distribution of newspaper commentary on the prospect 178 of military action against Iraq. 23 Proportional distribution of newspaper commentary on the prospect of 17 8 military action against Iraq, by publication. 24 Distribution of speeches by British MPs in debates on Iraq policy between 1 179 October 2002 and 15 February 2003. 25 Basic two -dimensional factor analysis of British public actors’ positions 18 0 towards war with Iraq between 1 October 2002 and 15 February 2003. 26 Opinion poll data showing support for military action against Iraq, 15 February 21 6 – 30 March 2003. 27 Distribution of speeches by British MPs in debates on Iraq policy between 15 21 6 February and 18 March 2003. 28 Average editorial positions adopted by leading UK newspapers towards 21 7 military action in Iraq, controlling for circulation, October 2002 – February 2003. 29 Volume of commentary articles in UK newspapers relating to Iraq, 1 February 21 8 – 20 March 2003. 30 Proportional distribution of newspaper commentary on the prospect of 21 8 military action against Iraq, by publication, 15 February – 20 March 2003. 31 Basic factor analysis of positions taken by leading public actors towards war 219 with Iraq, 15 February – 20 March 2003. 6 Figure Description Page 32 Front page of The Daily Mail, 19 July 2003. 23 3 33 Front page of The Independent, 29 January 2004. 23 5 34 Conservative Party election poster, 2005. 24 1 35 Voting intention polls, January 2002 – May 2005. 242 36 Passive public approval of the decision to take military action in Iraq, March 243 2003 – May 2005. 37 Labour vote trends in constituencies with highest Muslim populations, 2005 247 general election. 38 Proportional distribution of sources cited for UK major newspaper news 275 stories on Iraq, February 2002 – March 2003. 39 Proportional distribution of sources cited for UK major newspaper news 276 stories on Iraq, February 2002 – March 2003. 40 Proportional distribution of sources drawn from UK government and public 277 sources. 41 Average position on rectitude of war taken by commentary articles in leading 278 UK national newspapers (n-numbers in brackets). 42 Results of the regression analysis of variable ‘govsource’. 279 43 Results of the regression analysis of variable ‘pubsource’. 280 44 Average position of newspaper commentary, controlling for circulation, 282 January 2002 – March 2003. 7 Chapter 1 – In search of the Loch Ness Monster... Research question and research design Every student of foreign affairs experiences the tension between a historian’s compulsion to explain specific past events , and that of a political scientist to understand general phenomena . Although the two approaches are distinct, they are also ultimately complimentary (cf. Lawson 2012). In this study I seek to strike a balance between the investigation of events and the illumination of phenomena. My subject is the interaction between the government led by Tony Blair and British public opinion during the period between 11 September 2001 and the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. I ask specifically what was the impact of that interaction; on the public, on the government, on the decision to launch an aggressive war against Saddam Hussein, and what were the conflict’s longer-term domestic political consequences. It is a question of some personal interest, but for social scientists, as King, Keohane and Verba remind us, “personal reasons are neither necessary nor sufficient justifications for the choice of a topic” (King, Keohane and Verba 1994, 15). I begin, therefore, by outlining a conceptual rationale for this project.