New contours in UK elections

The lies and misrepresentations by the British ex-prime minister Tony Blair led the nation into the long and destructive war with Iraq. Now we all know that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. The evidence that he had was bent almost out of recognition to the true facts. The cost in lives torn asunder in Iraq was immense, and only a handful of Iraqis thought they were better off with the war than without it. There may have been a dictatorship that was cruel to those that opposed it but most people, if fearful on occasion, had a peaceful life, law and order, food in the shops and functioning schools and a health service.

That unnecessary carnage is on many people’s minds as Britain prepares to vote in its general election. Blair led the charge but his cabinet (with one major exception, Robin Cook, the leader of the House of Commons and former minister of foreign affairs) and the party supported him.

Nevertheless, the state of the economy is the number one issue, according to the polls. Prime Minister Gordon Brown is convincing – no one intellectually outshines Brown when it comes to economics and finance. He argues that the great recession wasn’t his fault and the UK was one of the two important countries who led the fight to mitigate it. (The other being the US.)

The Conservatives argue they would have done better and not run up such debts on out-of-control social expenditures as Labour did, thus giving the country not enough room for manoeuvre when the crisis hit. The Liberal Democrats successfully steer a middle way, taking the best arguments from the Conservatives without falling into their trap of promising over large cuts in government expenditure.

Most of the lower working class, at the bottom of the social pyramid, will vote Labour. But the upper working class and the lower middle class are where the swing votes lie. The Conservative prime minister, Margaret Thatcher, a grocer’s daughter, knew how to reach these people. The Conservative leader, David Cameron who led a spoilt life at Eton and Oxford and still comes over as a bit of a “toff”, is way out of touch with this grouping. He will lose most of its vote.

Frustrated, they are starting to move into the Liberal Democratic camp. Before Labour’s rise to power in the 1920s the Liberals often formed the government. In the 1960s and 70s the number of seats they held was in single digits. But over the last twenty years they have grown steadily to become a powerful third force. If they can capture say half this grouping it is conceivable they could win the most votes- but not seats as the Liberal vote although in the aggregate is strong is more thinly spread than the two major parties.

This is where we return to the anti-war faction, made up largely of the educated middle class. They have not forgotten the war. They understand that Brown was too loose in his economic policies before the great recession recession struck. However, many may relegate the war to second position in their minds and vote Labour again. They feel that Brown is a safe pair of hands. But for a majority the Liberal Democrats may appeal more because they are the only party that was against the war, is against overdoing the connection with the US and is vigorously pro the European Union and would seek to strengthen it. It favours the Euro, the common European currency, that the UK has always rebuffed despite Tony Blair’s sympathy for it. (Brown out manoeuvred him on that.)

This portion of the well educated bloc, by and large, is cautious about a commitment to war and is convinced that government cuts shouldn’t fall disproportionately on the social and health services. Of course they don’t want to see their own tax burden increased but there are many other ways of increasing the revenue that the government needs to run down its debts. Taxes on tobacco, drink, petrol, cars and air travel could be increased if they were raised immediately after the election when unpopular measures are easier to get away with. Then they could save a lot of money by getting rid of the UK’s nuclear deterrent, clearly a Cold War anachronism. There is a need to prune the bureaucracy. Not least taxes and their abused exemptions could be increased on David Cameron’s class. Raising death duties and closing its loopholes would be a popular step.

All this said there is no chance that the Liberal Democrats even with great success at the polls could form a government on their own. Yet to enter a coalition would lead them to betray all they have fought for over decades. They should stay out and force the two major parties to form a grand coalition. They agree on more than they disagree.

The Liberal Democrats leading the opposition would have a field day. They should bide their time until the Labour-Conservative coalition falls apart in two or three years and then force a new election. Then they would have a chance of becoming parliament’s largest party, able to dictate the terms of a new coalition.

Foreign affairs columnist, film-maker and author

Share

Related Posts

Peace is promoted by constructive proposals and dialogue Four preceding PressInfos have expressed concern over — and criticised — the ongoing, militarisation of the EU. Some will say: but there are no alternatives. We believe that there are always alternatives, that democracies are characterised by alternatives and choice, and that openly discussed alternatives will improve the quality and legitimacy of society’s decision–making. In addition, it is an intellectual and moral challenge to not only criticise but also be constructive. If we only tell people that we think they are wrong, they are not likely to listen. However, if we say: what are your views on this set of ideas and steps? — we may sometimes engage them in dialogue and sow a seed. Most people in power circles live their daily lives in in a time frame and a social space where certain ideas, viewpoints and concepts are just not...
Photos © TFF 2000 Read PressInfo 90 “Lift the Sanctions and Bring More Aid to Yugoslavia” See Pictures from Belgrade © TFF 2000 Please reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but please retain the source.
Av FRANK SØHOLM GREVIL 16 augusti 2004  Vi er nu nået til tredje akt i det absurde teaterstykke, der i analogi med de store skueprocesser i Moskva 1936-38 er blevet døbt ‘Grevil-sagen’. Første akt bestod i min anonyme fremlæggelse af egenhændigt nedklassificerede rapporter i Berlingske Tidende i februar og marts. Andet akt udgjordes af min fremtræden med navn og billede i Information i april samt den efterfølgende mediestorm, som uden min direkte medvirken kostede en forsvarsminister taburetten samt en sigtelse for brud på tavshedspligten. Tredje akt bliver en retssag, hvor jeg står tiltalt for at have overtrådt straffelovens bestemmelser om uberettiget videregivelse eller udnyttelse af fortrolige oplysninger. Statsanklageren har ovenikøbet valgt at påberåbe sig særligt skærpende omstændigheder. Da jeg aldrig har modtaget betaling for at stille rapporterne til rådighed eller lade mig interviewe, må det skærpende bestå i, at “videregivelsen eller udnyttelsen er sket under sådanne omstændigheder, at det påfører...

Recent Articles

Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.

TFF on Substack

Discover more from TFF Transnational Foundation & Jan Oberg.

Most Popular

Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Read More
Screenshot-2026-05-15-103534
Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Screenshot-2026-05-12-104023
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (2)
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (1)
Jan Oberg, TFF director April 28, 2026 In this third TFF Peace Pulse, I make the important distinction between the violence and the conflict that violence is a symptom of. If you want peace, focus on the underlying conflict because that is the key to resolution, peacemaking, and a better future for the parties. The West is obsessed with violence, just look around you – and 90+ per cent of the public debate is about military issues and other violence – totally wasted for peace. These Peace Pulses will only be published here a few times. You will also not find them on YouTube and Vimeo because both platforms have blocked TFF and me; you know, peace is dangerous these days. Most TFF’s videos since 2007 are now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551
In contrast to most, we’ll bring alternatives, solutions, hope and strategies for a better future. Times are dangerous, yes, but that only intensifies the need for constructive thinking and action! Jan Oberg, TFF director April 13, 2026 The new TFF Peace Pulse uses video messages in a new way: Max 3-5-minute-long comments, ideas or perhaps mini-lectures, all about peace – positive peace. We launch them today on April 13, 2026 with a carefully crafted visual aesthetic fitting the content. We hope to publish them regularly from now on. We launch Peace Pulse (PP) – for a number of reasons. The world is in chaos, and there are countless reasons to feel concerned, frustrated, even angry. The atmosphere is saturated with doom and gloom, with negative energy and rear‑mirror thinking, while vision, imagination, alternatives, strategies and genuine future‑mindedness remain in short supply. And without them, we simply can’t save the world. Looking at problems from a hundred angles will...
IMG_5165 (1)
PART II — Publishing Peace in a System That Prioritises Militarism Jan Oberg, TFF director April 10, 2026 How TFF Maintains a Daily Voice in a Digital World Built for Noise This article is part of the series “TFF at 40″ and it invites you to learn about Four Decades of Publishing Peace. It takes a look at how a small, people‑financed peace foundation has communicated across four generations of technology — from wax stencils and fax machines to mass email and Substack — and why TFF continues to publish every single day in a system that rewards noise, conflict, and militarism. ◆ What it means to publish peace every single day in a digital system built for 24/7 news and other noise, confrontation, and militarism. How TFF’s independence, continuity, and global readership defy algorithms, donor cycles, and Western media censorhip — and why the Majority World keeps listening. When the...