PUBLIC ATTITUDES TO WAR


FIGURE 2: THE JUSTIFIABILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF MILITARY ACTION FOR VARIOUS PURPOSES


Defending Britain from invasion


Defending allies from external threats


Preventing abuses of human rights


Removing a dictator from power


Ensuring the supply of vital resources


Peacekeeping in international operations


Preventing a state from acquiring WMD Promoting


democracy abroad


Attacking states thought to harbour terrorists


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean rating (0-6 scale)


majority (56 per cent) wanted Britain to ‘withdraw all troops immediately’, with 24 per cent opting to ‘continue the war as now’ and only 20 per cent favouring ‘send in more troops’.


Figure 3 shows how the proportion favouring immediate troop withdrawal varies according to respondents’ general view on the justifiability and effectiveness of military action. Both graphs show the expected downward trend. Yet, strikingly, even those who regard the use of force as wholly justifiable and very effective (ie, those scoring 6 on the scales) are far from unanimous in support for this particular war – around one in three favour immediate withdrawal. Opinions on Afghanistan also seem to be driven more by practical than ethical considerations, with the effectiveness graph sloping a little more steeply than the justifiability graph.


It is not difficult to think of reasons why even those with a generally favourable outlook on military action might want troops out of Afghanistan. We suggested six such reasons to respondents and asked them to choose and rank their top three in order of importance. The results in Table 1 show that the military death toll is overwhelmingly the public’s major concern about the war in Afghanistan. (Civilian casualties, though far outnumbering British military casualties, seem to cause the public much less disquiet). There is also anxiety about possible terrorist retaliation, and some of the public resent the lack of clarity over the reasons for fighting. This last point underlines our main finding about public ambivalence towards military action. Very few citizens are flatly opposed to using


Justified Effective


FIGURE 3: SUPPORT FOR WITHDRAWAL FROM AFGHANISTAN BY GENERAL VIEWS ON MILITARY ACTION


100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0


0 1 2 3


force, but they need persuading of its merits, both practical and moral. Where they feel that this case has not been clearly made, and worry that the costs in terms of soldiers’ lives are beginning to outweigh the supposed benefits, their attitudes are likely to take a pronounced dovish turn. Put simply, the public can be talked out of military action, just as they can be talked into it. What really matters, then, is who – politicians, journalists, religious leaders – does the talking. n


i


Robert Johns (University of Strathclyde) and Graeme Davies (University of Leeds) are co-investigators on the ESRC Award ‘Foreign policy attitudes and support for war among the British public’


ESRC Grant Number RES-062-23-1952


TABLE 1: RANKING OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN


Ranked


British military casualties


Risk of terrorist retaliation


purpose Ranked 15


Uncertainty about 15 Afghan civilian


casualties Cost of war to


taxpayers Damage to


reputation


9 5 3


21 22 13 20 16 6


Ranked Not top


first (%) second (%) third (%) three (%) 53


9


19 16 13 32 10


17 44 56 58 47 81


AUTUMN 2010 SOCIETY NOW 23 4


Justified Effective


5 Justifiability/effectiveness of war (0-6 scale)


6


% ‘withdraw troops immediately’


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32