Should the UN have sanctioned the US military involvement in Iraq?
| Article No. 36 -
In the first international qualitative poll since the war began in Iraq, Roy Morgan International has surveyed opinions of the United Nations' stand on Iraq, and explored the reasons behind the views of 1,660 randomly selected people across the United States, UK, Australia, and New Zealand, about five days after the war began, March 24-26, 2003.:
March 30, 2003 |
In the first international qualitative poll since the war began in Iraq, Roy Morgan International has surveyed opinions of the United Nations' stand on Iraq, and explored the reasons behind the views of 1,660 randomly selected people across the United States, UK, Australia, and New Zealand, about five days after the war began, March 24-26, 2003.
When asked whether the United Nations should have supported military action against Iraq to depose Saddam Hussein or not, 81% of Americans said yes, as did 66% of Britons, 61% of Australians and 50% of New Zealanders. However, the reasons given for their views show how deeply divided these nations are - on the issue of Iraq - and on the role of the United Nations, America, and democratic countries, in enforcing World peace.
There were diverse reasons given for the belief that the UN should have supported military action against Iraq. However, underpinning many of the reasons given was a fundamental belief that the fight - against Saddam Hussein, for democracy, and for world peace - was right.
"I think it’s the correct thing to do. The regime should not be there. It’s morally and socially the correct thing to do".
"I think that after all the atrocities that have been going on, I think that he should be out- whatever means that takes".
"It should have supported the US on moral grounds. To free the world from a physco".
For some, this view went as far as believing it to be the UN's role to suppress bad regimes.
"Because it is down to the UN to protect everyone and they let that country down".
"Because it is the UN who should manage this. It is their job to suppress bad regimes".
"Because the United Nations have a responsibility to remove leaders who are irresponsible in holding weapons of mass destruction and lacking in humanitarian regimes".
While others believed it to be the role of the US as the Super Power to clean out all the dictators, and that other democratic nations and the UN should come in behind the US in that endeavour.
"Number one, I back my President. Number two, Saddam Hussein has lied to everyone, so he must die".
"All of the nations should be with the United States because George Bush has done a lot for a lot of those countries".
"America has helped all the other countries with their wars and all of a sudden you've got everybody turning against you. You help somebody and when you go to them for help they turn their back on you".
"Because I just read some information that the US spends the most money to support the UN, therefore I think they should support our considerations".
Some people believed the UN should have supported the military action in Iraq, essentially because Saddam Hussein's regime had not abided by the criteria laid down in the last Gulf War; enough warnings had been given, and action was needed.
"Because they had twelve years to sort him out and have done nothing. They all knew what he was doing".
"Twelve years is enough. Time for talking is over. Action needed to be taken".
"A resolution has been there for many years to disarm Saddam Hussien and his chemical weapons and they let go of the issue".
"Because of 911 and the Gulf War. He should have been disposed 12 years ago when we had the chance".
"Cos I think they had 12 years and countless resolutions to get rid of the arms and without force or implied use of force can’t get the job done"
In a similar vein, was the view that there was enough evidence there about weapons.
"Because based on the evidence they found they needed to".
"Because of the evidence that Iraq has demonstrated that it will not succumb to established rules regarding weapons of mass destruction".
"Because there’s strong evidence to prove that he is a dictator with weapons of mass destruction that he’s not supposed to have".
"Evidence of what he’s been up to was pretty clear".
"Because Saddam has stuff he shouldn’t have. Weapons of mass destruction".
"There may not be concrete evidence but enough for action".
Beyond the belief that the UN should have supported military action, was the view espoused by some that the UN's inaction has devalued them. Words like "irrelevant" and "toothless" were used.
"They’re just impotent if they do nothing".
"Because I think that’s their role, they were not prepared to act so that makes them irrelevant".
"Because the UN tends to be toothless".
"If the United Nations can’t do it who can? The United Nations is pretty weak and hopeless. If it can’t do what it’s supposed to, get rid of it, disband it completely".
"They are a spineless body and they have no good in this world".
There was also a view expressed that a sign of strength and solidarity from the UN would have prevented the war, and especially if France and Germany had come in behind the move. This view is aligned to the more general view that a diplomatic solution would have been better than a military one.
"If they had all been in agreement, they may not have gotten to this stage".
"If they were seen to have been behind it, it may not have gotten to the point it is now".
"I think that if the UN had acted we might not be in the mess we are now in".
"If the Coalition stood up there would have been disarmament".
Those who believe the UN did the right thing in not supporting US military action in Iraq, also gave a range of reasons. There was a fundamental view that there is never justification for invasion, and that no country has the right to tell another how to live. This is of course diametrically opposed to those who said the UN and/or US are responsible for ridding the world of dictators and bad regimes.
"I don’t like it but it is for the nation itself to fix the problem".
"Iraq needs to be self governing and people should not interfere. There are a lot of dictators I the world and you can not just decide to interfere".
"It’s between Iraq and Iraq only and not between the rest of the world… the people in Iraq should be doing something about it".
There was a strong anti-war sentiment expressed in a number of different ways.
Firstly, humanitarian concerns were raised, in terms of the cost of war in human lives and suffering.
"All sorts of innocent people are dying and our soldiers are dying and for what?"
"Because they are killing innocent people and I am sure that there are other ways that they can overcome this problem"
"Only innocent people are being killed"
"Just the cost of war and loss of human lives".
"I just think its going to cause a great loss of lives. Could have been another way of dealing with it".
Secondly, the view was expressed that a diplomatic solution was needed, rather than war. Moreover, it was considered that a diplomatic solution, or "another way" was possible.
"There are other avenues that should have been carried out first".
"Would have preferred that they’d given diplomacy more time to work"
"There are better ways to achieve their objectives instead of killing innocent people".
"Diplomacy was an adequate resolution and a valid option at the time".
In line with this was the view expressed that the UN was in the middle of a process (ie the weapon inspection process) and that the process should have been allowed to run its course - not interrupted by war.
"The US should have waited a bit longer… should have let the UN finish off what they were supposed to do and then take action".
"The process with UN could’ve worked if they had more time"
"I think the mediation hasn’t been explored fully, I think the United States pre-empted the mediation process".
A lack of proof or evidence of weapons and/or terrorist links was also articulated, in support of the UN's position.
"I don’t believe the case for military action is proven".
"I don’t think approving military force should be given lightly and without proof and I don’t think they had that".
"No evidence shown of weapons of mass destruction or intention to use them"
"No justification/evidence for military action to be taken, no cause for the war".
For some, the issue was seen as political, "about oil" was a common phrase; and for some, it was seen as America's battle, and "one they should fight themselves".
"Only the Americans are involved in it. It’s not really a world thing".
"I believe Mr Bush has separate agendas, namely oil. It’s a misuse of an American superpower and the Bush Administration is acting irresponsibly."
"Because the war is with America, not the world".
"I really feel its so the Yanks can get a lot of oil, they don’t really give a stuff about the Iraqi people, or else they would be beating up a lot of other people too".
UN support for military action against Iraq
People surveyed were asked: "Taking everything into account, do you think the United Nations should have supported military action against Iraq to depose Saddam Hussein or not?"
| |
USA |
UK |
Australia |
New Zealand |
| |
% |
% |
% |
% |
| UN should have supported |
81 |
66 |
61 |
50 |
| UN should not have supported |
14 |
26 |
33 |
40 |
| Can't Say |
5 |
8 |
6 |
10 |
|
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
|
"Why especially do you say that?" |
USA |
UK |
Australia |
New Zealand |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saddam Hussein should be deposed for the terrible things he has done and could do - crimes against humanity. |
22 |
11 |
11 |
11 |
|
|
Iraq has had long enough to disarm - since the last Gulf War - and the UN should have been prepared to act. |
17 |
7 |
9 |
8 |
|
|
By not acting the UN has made itself irrelevant. |
10 |
4 |
11 |
5 |
|
|
There was enough evidence to show that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. |
9 |
3 |
5 |
1 |
|
|
Pro-US super power. The US gets the job done so the UN should back them. |
9 |
1 |
7 |
3 |
|
|
All countries should be united and work together for peace and democracy. |
8 |
12 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
General moral view - it was the right thing to do. |
5 |
5 |
1 |
- |
|
|
Fear of future attacks by Saddam Hussein. |
5 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
A sign of solidarity by the members of the UN would have prevented war. |
4 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
It is the UN's job to suppress bad regimes. |
4 |
6 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
If there was a terrorist link then the UN should have agreed. |
3 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
A diplomatic solution was best. |
1 |
1 |
1 |
- |
|
|
Other |
11 |
16 |
12 |
13 |
|
|
Can't say |
3 |
5 |
2 |
5 |
|
|
Total UN should have supported military action ** |
81 |
66 |
61 |
50 |
|
|
A diplomatic solution is better than war. |
6 |
9 |
14 |
14 |
|
|
There was no proof that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction/ terrorist links. |
4 |
2 |
6 |
5 |
|
|
The war is mixed up with politics/ its about oil. |
3 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
|
|
The UN was in the middle of a process that should have been allowed to run its course. |
2 |
3 |
8 |
4 |
|
|
It's a US battle that should be fought by the US. |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
No country has the right to tell another country how to live. |
* |
2 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
Humanitarian reasons - the cost of human lives. |
* |
3 |
2 |
4 |
|
|
Other |
2 |
6 |
4 |
9 |
|
|
Can't Say |
1 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
Total UN should not have supported military action** |
14 |
26 |
33 |
40 |
|
|
Can’t say |
5 |
8 |
6 |
10 |
|
* Less than 1%; ** Some respondents gave more than one answer
Roy Morgan International Poll conducted by telephone - sample and sampling tolerance:
USA cross section of 402 men and women aged 18+; UK cross section of 423 men and women aged 18+
Australia cross section of 408 electors aged 18+; NZ cross section of 427 men and women aged 18+
The margin of error to be allowed for in any estimate depends mainly on the number of interviews on which it is based. The following table gives indications of the likely range within which estimates would be 95% likely to fall, expressed as the number of percentage points above or below the actual estimate. The figures are approximate and for general guidance only, and assume a simple random sample. Allowance for design effects should be made as appropriate.
Sample size Percentage estimate
25-75% 10% or 90% 5% or 95%
500 ±4 1/2 ±3 ±2
|
Australia
Gary Morgan or Michele Levine
401 Collins Street,
Melbourne VIC, 3000.
G.P.O Box 2282U,
Melbourne VIC, 3001.
Phone: +61 3 9629 6888
Email: Australia@roymorgan.com
|
USA
New York office
122 East 42nd Street
Tower Suite, 41st floor
Phone: 0011 1 212 725 7676
Fax: 0015 1 212 725 7529
Email: US@roymorgan.com
|
USA
Mapes & Ross
349 Wall Street Princeton,
New Jersey 08540-1518
Phone: 0011 1 609 924 8600
Fax: 0015 1 609 924 9208
Email: US@roymorgan.com
|
|
United Kingdom
Grnd flr, Suite 74-78
Temple Chambers Bldg.
3-7 Temple Avenue
London EC4Y 0HP
Phone: +44 0 207 427 0150
Fax: +44 0 207 353 8698
Email: UK@roymorgan.com
|
Indonesia
Wisma 46 Kota BNI, JL.
Jendral Sudirman Kav 1
Jakarta 10220 Indonesia
Tel: +62 21 572 2021
Fax:+62 21 572 4864
Email: Ind@roymorgan.com
|
New Zealand
Level 4,52 Swanson Street,
Auckland.
Telephone: +64 9 912 7032
Fax: +64 9 913 1789
Email: nz@roymorgan.com
|
|
Roy Morgan International now conducts media and social research in the United States,United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand.
Roy Morgan International was the most accurate poll in predicting the margin in the recent United Kingdom election (see International article No. 11). Roy Morgan Research is the Australian and New Zealand member of the Gallup International Association, the largest group of independent market research companies in the world. |
|
