IRAQ may be about to move to the centre stage of British politics. The war has so far been a niche issue, of passionate concern to a minority but not to the majority. But this could be changing as a result both of the appalling level of violence in and around Baghdad and of changes in British politics.

Since autumn 2003, the public has become more critical. More than half the public thinks that taking military action was the wrong thing to do, and just three in ten the right thing. By a similar margin, the public disapproves of Tony Blair’s handling of the current situation in Iraq.

But that is only half the story. Voters may have clearcut views, but not rate the issue very highly. According to a Populus poll for The Times in late April, Iraq came twelfth and last in a list of the most important issues facing Britain today, mentioned by just 6 per cent. This compared with 65 per cent saying that the NHS was among the most important issues. Iraq was even below international poverty and Europe. It was ranked only ninth among Liberal Democrat supporters, even though Charles Kennedy had highlighted Iraq in the previous week.

Moreover, more voters (36 per cent) regarded Labour as having the best policies on Iraq than either the Tories or the Lib Dems (at 23 and 24 per cent).

The domestic impact of Iraq has been limited by the strong support that Iain Duncan Smith and the Tory leadership gave for military action in spring 2003. Michael Howard’s later attempt to distance himself by criticising intelligence failings was reasonable and defensible, but sounded like legal sophistry when he reiterated his support for the war.

So the Lib Dems and smaller parties such as Respect scooped up the anti-war vote four months ago. While Iraq unquestionably damaged Labour in the election, reducing its majority, it was not a decisive factor.

Mr Blair’s hopes of drawing a line under the war by winning re-election for a third term have been dashed, rather as President Bush’s ratings have fallen to a new low, partly because of Iraq. The argument is now no longer about what happened before the military action, but about its bloody aftermath. As Sir Malcolm Rifkind argued on Newsnight on Wednesday, it is no longer good enough to say that Iraq is better off without Saddam. The horrible nightly pictures from Baghdad may put Mr Blair increasingly on the defensive.

Domestic opposition to his Iraq policy may also broaden. Kenneth Clarke’s powerful speech yesterday on Iraq and terrorism pointed the way to a hard-edged alternative to the Blair approach. This could have increasing electoral appeal, especially as it will not be easy for Gordon Brown to make a fresh start on the issue. Mr Clarke has credibility, as well as authority, because he opposed the war, as did Sir Malcolm. They also reflect the views of many Tories, apart from the small band of neo-conservative sympathisers around Mr Duncan Smith.

For many Tories, Mr Clarke’s ability to challenge Mr Blair, and to attract broader support, is not enough to counteract their other doubts about him, notably over Europe. But Iraq need not just be a Lib Dem issue. There is potential here for the Tories, all depending on whom they elect as leader.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• UK regional accents thrive against the odds
• ‘Scarecrow’ wind farms put rare birds to flight
• What an anti-climax: G-spot is a myth