Conservatives Vote Against Iraq War

IOTL in the House of Commons vote on the declaration of war on Iraq, both the Labour Party and the Conservative Party voted in favour of war with Iraq.

However, what if ITTL IDS ordered his MPs to vote against the war. This change in votes would easily be enough to reject the motion for war with Iraq. How would this affect Blair's Premiership, seeing as this would definitely be his biggest defeat.

So what would Britain's involvement in Iraq be? How would this affect the Labour Party? How would it affect the public's perception of the Tories? IOTL the Lib Dems were able to repeatedly say that they were the only anti-war party in Parliament...
 
Last edited:
Oh thanks, sorry, I didn't realise IDS was leader at the time.

Yeah. It might have made a difference - IDS bought into neoconservative ideas of regime change in a way I think Michael Howard may well not have.

I suspect, if the Tories had indicated their intention to vote against, Blair would have cancelled the vote. Reputedly Bush told Blair he understood the difficulties and it was fine if Britain didn't get involved in Iraq. Avoiding a vote altogether avoids the embarrassment of defeat and a potential censure motion (though I think Blair would have won that), and gives him the option of some sort of involvement later (perhaps sending troops to help out in a post-invasion Iraq).
 
I suspect, if the Tories had indicated their intention to vote against, Blair would have cancelled the vote. Reputedly Bush told Blair he understood the difficulties and it was fine if Britain didn't get involved in Iraq. Avoiding a vote altogether avoids the embarrassment of defeat and a potential censure motion (though I think Blair would have won that), and gives him the option of some sort of involvement later (perhaps sending troops to help out in a post-invasion Iraq).

Except I don't think Blair was going into Iraq without the vote, which he was absolutely behind doing; he also said he would resign if the vote didn't go his way, so I'm guessing he still puts (the UK's role in) the war and his job on the line.
 
Well technically it's not like he ever needed the vote to go ahead and join in, he simply did it to get some bipartisan support and spread the blame around. If the Conservatives are looking unsure and let Labour know that they'd vote against it I could see him not bothering with it in the first place and simply using the Royal Prerogative as Prime Minister.
 
Except I don't think Blair was going into Iraq without the vote, which he was absolutely behind doing;

Yes, but the situation changes post-invasion - a vote becomes more winnable (because the bombs have already dropped and our forces will be doing reconstruction).

he also said he would resign if the vote didn't go his way, so I'm guessing he still puts (the UK's role in) the war and his job on the line.

Oh, I'd forgotten that. But as with the vote itself, if he thinks he's going to lose surely he doesn't make that threat. Bush did tell him he could bow out - surely he wouldn't sacrifice everything when he's bound to lose anyway. Or does he genuinely believe that the threat of losing him will work against rebellious backbenchers?
 
Blair does seem to of been something of a true believer over Iraq who thought he was doing the right thing. Politically aside from a couple more minor resignations that are survivable I don't think it could of gotten much worse for him, so if it looks like a vote won't go his way I could see him not bothering with either it or the threat of resignation and simply announcing it as a fait accompli.
 
Bush told Blair not to join the invasion if it would politically hurt him. That would have been good advice for both Bush and Blair as it would have helped Blair politically and the Iraq War would have gone better if the U.S. was in charge of securing Southern Iraq.

The Pentagon and the U.S. generals made mistakes in Iraq, but the British making a non-aggression pact with al-Sadr thus letting him build a militia and letting the Iranians flow into Southern Iraq freely made mistakes by Rummy and Franks seem tiny.
 

Heavy

Banned
Didn't Blair mention that, if he was unable to secure parliament's support for an Iraq operation, he would either resign or go to the country, or am I misremembering?
 
I can't see the Tories voting against it but what they should have done is take a more skeptical position and make their support conditional on WMD's being found and proving there was a real security threat. When it becomes clear that the case for war was dodgy then they'd be able to attack Blair and could gain more seats in the subsequent election than IOTL.
 

abc123

Banned
But why not simply use the POD that Blair decided not to get involved in Iraq operation at all- what consequences?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
If the British do not join in the invasion, it will radically change the military picture, too. The British contribution was not a token, symbolic gesture. IIRC, about a quarter of the troops involved in the initial invasion were British.

If the Brits stay out, it means that the Americans are going to have to ship in something like 40,000 extra troops. That is going to increase the cost of the operation considerably and raise opposition to it back home. Even worse for President Bush, it will take out the appearance of multinationalism (especially since the Australians would probably back out if the British aren't involved).
 

abc123

Banned
If the British do not join in the invasion, it will radically change the military picture, too. The British contribution was not a token, symbolic gesture. IIRC, about a quarter of the troops involved in the initial invasion were British.

If the Brits stay out, it means that the Americans are going to have to ship in something like 40,000 extra troops. That is going to increase the cost of the operation considerably and raise opposition to it back home. Even worse for President Bush, it will take out the appearance of multinationalism (especially since the Australians would probably back out if the British aren't involved).

I wonder, would Bush even decide to invade Iraq without British ( and Australian ) support?
 
IDS would never have voted against the war. I've met the man (he's my local MP) and I hold him in a vast amount of contempt.
 
It makes me wonder if the Tories would have as large a bost in the 05' election as the Lib Dems in OTL. If so then the Conservatives will have a narrow lead over Labour in popular vote, however Labour still holds a majority.
 
Top