• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What was the effect, domestically and internationally of Blairs support of Bush in the Iraq war

Extracts from this document...


What was the effect, domestically and internationally of Blair's support of Bush in the Iraq war? Early in the year 2002 Tony Blair assured George W. Bush that the United Kingdom would support the United States of America in the event of a war in the Iraq crisis1. It should not take more than another year for this war to start. On March 20, 2003 to be precisely, the United Kingdom joined the American forces in attacking Iraq. The attack was based on the presumption that Iraq, under the command of Saddam Hussein, had acquired weapons of mass destruction and was proposing a severe threat to the peace of our world.2 This reason was and still is heavily criticized as the United Nations Security Council did not give its mandate for the war in the first place and up until today, no weapons of mass destruction have been found. Inspections have shown that Iraq had abandoned the programs of developing or acquiring this kind of weapon earlier.3 When the United Kingdom under the leadership of Tony Blair attacked Iraq together with the United States on March 20, 2003 this should have significant consequences for the country. The term paper at hand will try to illustrate some of these consequences and illustrate both the influences on domestic and the international affairs for the United Kingdom in the early years after the war. ...read more.


The unpopularity of Brown is often seen as a key element in this context.24 Labour was not able to continue its leadership in the 2010 elections and Gordon Brown stepped down.25 International Effects Just as the domestic politics, the international position of the UK too experienced various consequences from Britain's decision to join the Iraq war. On an international level, the military action was especially crucial as the UN had not given its mandate and a lot of the European states were against it. Wide-ranging effects on its international relations were the result of Britain's choice. The relationship with the United States of America and in particular the one between Tony Blair and George Bush improved, of course and is seen as "one of the successes of the Blair period."26 Although Blair made efforts to prevent a possible military conflict, he was unable to change the attitude of the US. The bound with the States was one of the priorities of his politics so he provided the support.27 It made the UK a loyal ally and a major force in international politics from the US-American point of view.28 This is especially remarkable when it is considered that George Bush was a Republican President who belonged to the right wing while Blair as a member of Labour was rather dedicated to the ...read more.


The consequences were therefore a continuing isolation of a United Kingdom, which did not seem to welcome any of the European developments or values, such as working on a closer and better communication between the central European states or joining the common currency, the Euro. Europe moved on and kept developing without Britain while maintaining the European unity obviously always came second for Blair. The UK showed its intentions clearly when it was not prepared to endanger its Atlantic relations but willingly took part in a war which was against the agreement of its European neighbours. The few achievements Blair had accomplished before the war to improve his relations with the continent were negated by the war. It remained uncertain if the UK would change their politics in the future and choose a different direction. Yet, it was quite likely that a turning towards the central powers of Europe was not going to happen under Tony Blair. He gave some European speeches during his career but was in the end never willing to fulfil his goals. The intentions he had when he took office were neither pursued nor realized and Britain missed the chance of siding with Europe, opposing the USA and turning in a true European country. What stayed was the impression of an isolated Britain or of an 'awkward partner' as it had been called many times before. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree UK Government & Parliamentary Studies section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree UK Government & Parliamentary Studies essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    How presidential is the premiership of Tony Blair.

    3 star(s)

    This potentially means immense power for the Prime Minister, although as we will note he is still ultimately responsible to his party and Parliament. ARGUMENTS, DEBATES AND ILLUSTRATIVE MATERIAL Despite some minor rifts within the cabinet, for example between Blair and Brown, the cabinet seems largely united in support of the PM.

  2. Marked by a teacher


    In recent years, Blair has been criticised for being 'preoccupied' with foreign policy and neglecting traditional Labour values such as Trade Unions and other domestic issues. Blair responded to these comments at the TUC conference in September 2004 by saying "Even if I've never been away, it's time to show I'm back."

  1. To what extent was slavery the cause of the American Civil War?

    From henceforth the stakes were far higher, and the victory of one party was no longer merely the loss of another, but the subordination of a whole section. Slavery was the one issue that incited true sectional conflict and thus can be seen as the underlying cause of the Civil War but not the sole cause.

  2. Examine the effectiveness of terrorism in International Politics.

    Most authors who write about terrorism have considered this question. In his comments on this issue, Laqueur (1977 p.34) makes a distinction between individual assassinations of state leaders and systematic terrorist campaigns. He argues that individual assassinations of state leaders had, contrary to the popular belief, generally little impact on the general course of history.

  1. Immigration in the United States.

    in this country, which is all the more reason immigration should be halted. Current records show that there are between 2.5 and 4 million illegal or undocumented immigrants in the United States (Lactaguin 138). A large number of these immigrants are seasonal workers, here for a few months at a

  2. Britain and the Eurozone. Britains May 2005 parliamentary elections produced some very telling ...

    accordingly, while at the same time keeping the Atlanticist model in play with close UK-US relations. The political factors in the close relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States are very strong, most notably the relationship exhibited between the Blair-Clinton administration and the Blair-Bush administrations, especially on the issue of Iraq and foreign policy.

  1. Book Review on "Darfur: a Short History of a Long War"

    They argue that as a result of the drought in Darfur - the lakes had dried out because of the decrease Nile level and very low rain rate - and the Government's reluctance to help its people while the international community was unwilling to help Sudan as well because of

  2. Analyse three key strengths and three key weaknesses of the Conservative general election campaign ...

    As Ashcroft (2010, p.98) highlights, "In the 20 of Labour's 100 most vulnerable marginals that the Tories failed to win, the average non-white population was 15%. In the five of those that were in London, it was 28%?.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work