LONDON, 18 December 2003 — The contrast between how the US and British governments have handled news surrounding the capture of Saddam Hussein could hardly be more different, and with good reason: While the accomplishment has given an instant and dramatic boost to President Bush, Prime Minister Tony Blair’s political fortunes continue to be hampered by the situation in Iraq.
Saddam’s humiliation has been nearly the only topic on Britain’s 24-hour news channels since the story broke, and Monday most newspapers devoted their entire front page to his capture.
But until US troops found the fallen Iraqi dictator Saturday, his disappearance was only one issue among many — and not the most important — that contributed to continued opposition to the war and Blair’s willingness to align a largely unwilling nation with US policy on Iraq.
Chief among the criticism here for the president and prime minister is the coalition’s failure to locate weapons of mass destruction, whose existence were sold — particularly on this side of the Atlantic Ocean — as the primary reason for going to war.
“Assuming Saddam doesn’t lead everyone to a big pile of anthrax, any boost for Blair is going to be extremely short-term,’’ said Nick Gilby, a political analyst for MORI, Britain’s largest independent polling company. “In another month’s time, I think you could see his approval ratings as low as they’ve been, Saddam notwithstanding.’’
Next month, an independent judicial investigation called the Hutton Inquiry is expected to produce a report on Blair’s claims that Saddam was capable of launching chemical or biological weapons within 45 minutes. The investigation was prompted by the suicide of a British weapons expert, David Kelly, who slit his wrists after Blair’s government exposed him as the anonymous source for radio reports questioning the weapons claim.
The report is widely expected to be critical of the Blair government and, barring any change in the coalition’s failure to find such weapons, will again underscore that the prime minister’s primary reason for going to war has so far turned out to be untrue.
The failure to find the weapons is a much larger issue in Britain than in the United States and it has cost Blair dearly.
Once the most popular prime minister in British history, his ratings tumbled when he aligned himself with Bush and last month only 32 percent of Britons approved of his performance in office. He has yet to recover.
That may be part of the reason that while L. Paul Bremer, the US-appointed administrator in Iraq, announced triumphantly that “We got him,’’ and President Bush spoke of the “winning side’’ of the conflict, Blair’s announcement that Saddam had been captured came in almost somber tones and with a message that it was time for Sunni and Shiites in Iraq to pull together.
And while unidentified members of the Bush administration were telling reporters that Saddam was talkative and cooperating to a degree, Blair and his Cabinet stressed even more than the president that the war is far from over and that the capture should not be mistaken as a sign that the fighting in Iraq will end any time soon.
Perhaps trying to blunt any criticism that may come in the days and weeks ahead stemming from continued failures to find weapons of mass destruction, even though the man responsible for their creation has been captured, Blair’s Foreign Secretary,Jack Straw told reporters there was little hope of Saddam providing information about them.
“I’m not holding my breath for any confession statement,’’ Straw said.
Under Britain’s election system, Blair must stand for re-election in 2006, but he is widely expected to call for a vote in 2005. Despite his reduced popularity, he is still considered the favorite, but is seen as far more vulnerable than before the war.
