Number of Brits who see US as a global threat doubles since Donald Trump came to power
Even before the president bombed Iran at the weekend, almost three quarters of those asked — 72 per cent — named the US as a threat to world peace in the next decade.
Researchers said the figure, which has doubled since last autumn, when it was just 36 per cent, was an 'all time high'.
And it rivals China, on 69 per cent, Israel, on 73 per cent, and North Korea, on 77 per cent, although the highest was Russia on 90 per cent.
In recent months, Trump has alarmed the international community on a number of occassions, including when he raised doubts about his willingness to defend European countries and when held a televised showdown with Ukrainian President Zelensky in the Oval Office.
The latest British Social Attitudes (BSA) report, by the National Centre for Social Research, shows fears over the US' role in the world is split along political party lines.
Labour and Green supporters are more likely — by 81 and 96 per cent — than those who back the Conservatives or Reform UK — 68 and 41 per cent — to consider the US a serious threat.
The survey also shows that increased public concern over potential threats has led to a significant increase in support for defence spending.
Almost one in ten — 9 per cent — believe defence should be the top priority for extra government spending, the highest figure ever recorded in the survey.
Again, however, there are marked differences by party, with Conservative and Reform supporters more likely to be in favour than those who back Labour or the Greens.
Gianfranco Addario, research director at the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen), told The Independent the research did not go into the reasons why those who took part believe the US to be a significant threat, but said 'that would be very interesting to explore'.
He added: 'The escalation of recent international conflicts is clearly reflected in the attitudes of the British population, who have never been so supportive of military spending and so concerned about serious security threats since the British Social Attitudes survey first addressed the subject in 1985.
'Perception of the US as a security threat has increased since the 2024 presidential elections and the first 100 days of the Trump administration, reaching an all-time high.
'The Labour government's approach to addressing these concerns, particularly in navigating internal party divisions while aligning with public sentiment, will be crucial in determining its success in managing the country's security and defence policies.'
The British Social Attitudes survey has been conducted every year since 1983.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
a minute ago
- The Herald Scotland
U-turn as Trump administration agrees to keep Washington police chief in place
The order came after officials in the nation's capital sued on Friday to block President Donald Trump's takeover of the capital's police. Donald Trump (Jae C Hong/AP) The night before, his administration had escalated its intervention into the city's law enforcement by naming a federal official as the new emergency head of the department, essentially placing the police force under full control of the federal government. The attorney general's new order represents a partial retreat for the Trump administration in the face of intense scepticism from a judge over the legality of Ms Bondi's earlier directive, but she also signalled the administration would continue to pressure DC leaders to help federal authorities aggressively pursue immigrants in the country illegally, despite city laws that limit co-operation between police and immigration authorities. In a social media post on Friday evening, Ms Bondi criticised DC attorney general Brian Schwalb, saying he 'continues to oppose our efforts to improve public safety', but she added: 'We remain committed to working closely with Mayor Bowser.' Mayor Muriel Bowser's office said late on Friday that it was still evaluating how it can comply with the new Bondi order on immigration enforcement operations. The police department had already eased some restrictions on co-operating with federal officials facilitating Mr Trump's mass deportation campaign but reaffirmed that it would follow the district's sanctuary city laws. In a letter sent on Friday night to DC citizens, Ms Bowser wrote: 'It has been an unsettling and unprecedented week in our city. Over the course of a week, the surge in federal law enforcement across DC has created waves of anxiety.' Attorney general Pam Bondi (Mark Schiefelbein/AP) She added that 'our limited self-government has never faced the type of test we are facing right now', but added that if Washingtonians stick together, 'we will show the entire nation what it looks like to fight for American democracy – even when we don't have full access to it'. The legal battle was the latest evidence of the escalating tensions in a mostly Democratic city that now has its police department largely under the control of the Republican president's administration. Mr Trump's takeover is historic, yet it had played out with a slow ramp-up in federal law enforcement officials and National Guard troops to start the week. As the weekend approached, signs across the city — from the streets to the legal system — suggested a deepening crisis over who controls the city's immigration and policing policies, the district's right to govern itself and daily life for the millions of people who live and work in the metro area. The two sides sparred in court for hours Friday before US District Judge Ana Reyes, who is overseeing the district's lawsuit. She indicated the law is not likely to grant the Trump administration power to fully take over city police, but it probably gives the president more power than the city might like. 'The way I read the statute, the president can ask, the mayor must provide, but the president can't control,' said Judge Reyes, who was nominated to the bench by Joe Biden. The judge pushed the two sides to make a compromise. A lawyer for the Trump administration, Yaakov Roth, said the move to sideline Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith came after an immigration order that still held back some aid to federal authorities. He argued that the president has broad authority to determine what kind of help police in Washington must provide. Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP) The police takeover is the latest move by Trump to test the limits of his legal authorities to carry out his agenda, relying on obscure statutes and a supposed state of emergency to bolster his tough-on-crime message and his plans to speed up the mass deportation of people in the United States illegally. It also marks one of the most sweeping assertions of federal authority over a local government in modern times. While Washington has grappled with spikes in violence and visible homelessness, the city's homicide rate ranks below those of several other major US cities, and the capital is not in the throes of the public safety collapse the Trump administration has portrayed. The president has more power over the nation's capital than other cities, but DC has elected its own mayor and city council since the Home Rule Act was signed in 1973. Mr Trump is the first president to exert control over the city's police force since it was passed. The law limits that control to 30 days without congressional approval, though Mr Trump has suggested he would seek to extend it. Ms Bondi's Thursday night directive to place the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Terry Cole, in charge of the police department came after Ms Smith had told officers to share information with immigration agencies regarding people not in custody, such as someone involved in a traffic stop. The Justice Department said Ms Bondi disagreed with the police chief's instructions because they allowed for continued practice of 'sanctuary policies', which generally limit co-operation by local law enforcement with federal immigration officers.
Daily Mirror
a minute ago
- Daily Mirror
MIKEY SMITH: 11 unhinged Donald Trump moments as he gets absolutely played by Putin at Ukraine summit
The stage was set, there were logos on the backdrop, serving US military officers got on their knees to roll a red carpet all the way to the war criminal's plane. But while Putin got everything he wanted - Trump not so much Donald Trump met with Vladimir Putin in Alaska last night, and the Russian dictator appears to have played him like an extremely cheap fiddle. The stage was set, there were logos on the backdrop, serving US military officers got on their knees to roll a red carpet all the way to the war criminal's plane - though not quite to the President's But at the end of it all, there was no ceasefire. Putin got everything he wanted: Legitimacy, airtime, a chance to shower Trump with flattery while smirking at him, and a chance to discuss things other than Ukraine with a western world leader as if he wasn't an international pariah. And Trump, as far as we can tell, got nothing. The thing about Donald Trump is that for all the bluster, he's much better at setting up a meeting than he is at getting something out of it. He's not so much a master dealmaker as an average hotelier. Heres everything that happened at the Alaska summit that you need to know about. Buckle up. 1. Vlad's red carpet was longer than Trump's In an ominous signal of what was to come, Putin got a lit more red carpet than Trump did. The pair were supposed to walk to the podium from their respective aircraft down an L-shaped red carpet. But either through a lack of length, or the inept parking of Air Force One, Trump had to walk for quite some time on the air base tarmac before his feet found felt. All the while Putin's limpy feet enjoyed the plush fibres. 2. The applause, the shrugs, the smirks Trump weirdly applauded the ruthless Russian dictator who has ordered the deaths of countless people, undoubtedly committed war crimes, not to mention using banned nerve agents for assassinations on British soil. Upon reaching the podium, a waiting pool reporter shouted the not unreasonable question: "Are you going to stop killing civilians?" Putin pointed to his ear and shrugged, either indicating he couldn't hear properly, or didn't understand the language. Putin speaks English. He was asked the same question again at the top of the meeting, but again made a funny facial expression and said nothing. 3. They drove off There was a big fuss in Trump's first term about him having a short meeting with Putin where only the two leaders and Putin's interpreter - and nobody else on the American side - were there. It was quite a relief when the details of the meeting were switched up to a three-on-three, with envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio sitting in on Trump's end. But then Trump ushered Putin into his car, where they were alone for several minutes on the drive to the meeting - so Putin had a chance to get in Trump's ear alone after all. 4. The meeting setup was weird Normally if you're negotiating a peace treaty, everyone sits around a big table, with documents and officials and a big bit of wood to thump if things get heated. The setup in last night's meeting was much more formal. Like the bilateral meetings that happen at a G7 summit or foreign visit. Two leaders either side of a low table with their entourages flanking on each side. Almost like it was set up for a photo op rather than an actual negotiation. 5. The "press conference" at the end was even weirder After an about 3 hours of meetings, Trump and Putin walked out onto a nearby stage for a weird and stilted press conference. Sort of. Putin spoke first, which in itself is odd for a visiting world leader. And oddly for Trump, they walked off at the end without taking amy questions. 6. Putin laid it on Trump pretty thick - and thanked him for making him look less like a murderer Putin thanked Trump for the "friendly" tone of the conversation they had on Friday and said Russia and the United States should "turn the page and go back to cooperation." He praised Trump as someone who "has a clear idea of what he wants to achieve and sincerely cares about the prosperity of his country, and at the same time shows understanding that Russia's has its own national interests." "I expect that today's agreements will become a reference point not only for solving the Ukrainian problem, but will also mark the beginning of the restoration of businesslike, pragmatic relations between Russia and the U.S.," Putin said. Trump said there are "just a very few" issues to resolve concerning the war in Ukraine, without providing any sense of what those issues might be. "Some are not that significant," Trump said. "One is probably the most significant, but we have a very good chance of getting there. We didn't get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there." The president said he's "always had a fantastic relationship" with **Putin**. He referenced the U.S. government investigations into Russia's support for his 2016 presidential campaign and repeated his claims of the U.S. economy being the "hottest" in the world. 7. Putin made it clear he still thinks Ukraine is part of Russia **Putin** repeated Moscow's long-held position that it is "sincerely interested in putting an end" to the war in Ukraine, but for that to happen, "all the root causes of the crisis ... must be eliminated." What he means by that, as he explained in a rambling essay shortly after the invasion three years ago, is that Ukraine isn't a real country, and it breaking away from mother Russia is the root cause of the war. "All of Russia's legitimate concerns must be taken into account, and a fair balance in the security sphere in Europe and the world as a whole must be restored," Putin said. 8. 'Next time in Moscow' At the end of the "press conference", Trump said to Putin: "Thank you Vladimir, I will probably see you again very soon." Putin ominously replied (in English): "Next time in Moscow..." Trump made a weird "oooooh" sound, then admitted he might "get a little heat for that one." 9. Trump thinks everything went very well indeed, thankyou In an interview with (who else?) Fox News' Sean Hannity after the summit, Trump said he was "very happy to hear [Putin] say that if I was president that war would have never happened." It's been one of Trump's least plausible talking points since taking office. Hannity, to his credit, asked if Putin had given any specifics as to why that was the case. Trump replied: "It did. It doesn't matter at this point.' The President also claimed Putin had said: "I've never seen anybody do so much so country is, like, hot as a pistol," curiously echoing another of Trump's talking points. "A lot of points were agreed on," Trump said of progress towards a deal. "There's not that much. There's one or two pretty significant items. But I think they can be reached." In the end, Trump sort of shrugged and said: "Now it's really up to President Zelenskyy to get it done." We haven't seen what, if anything, was agreed with Putin yet, but we can probably take from this that if he objects to anything, it'll be another Oval Office showdown... Get Donald Trump updates straight to your WhatsApp! As the world attempts to keep up with Trump's antics, the Mirror has launched its very own US Politics WhatsApp community where you'll get all the latest news from across the pond. We'll send you the latest breaking updates and exclusives all directly to your phone. Users must download or already have WhatsApp on their phones to join in. All you have to do to join is click on this link, select 'Join Chat' and you're in! We may also send you stories from other titles across the Reach group. We will also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose Exit group. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. 10. Putin told Trump he agreed with him on mail-in voting Vladimir Putin, someone you would always go to for an expert opinion on free and fair elections, says Trump was right about 2020 being rigged. Trump said to Hannity: "Vladimir Putin said something - one of the most interesting things. He said 'your election was rigged because you have mail in voting.' "He said, 'mail in voting, every election - no country has mail in voting. It's impossible to have mail in voting and have honest elections.' "And he said that to me because we talked about 2020. He said, 'you won that election by so much.'" 11. After lengthy calls with world leaders, Zelensky will meet Trump on Monday There were reportedly lengthy calls between Trump and world leaders on Air Force One on his way back to Washington DC. He spoke with Keir Starmer, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, Polish President Karol Nawrocki, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. Mr Starmer is due to speak again with European leaders this morning. Mr Zelensky said the call began as a one-on-one between him and the US president, before European Nato leaders joined them. The Ukrainian leader also suggested he would travel to Washington DC at the start of next week to continue talks. Writing on social media, the Ukrainian president said: "We support President Trump's proposal for a trilateral meeting between Ukraine, the USA, and Russia. Ukraine emphasises that key issues can be discussed at the level of leaders, and a trilateral format is suitable for this. "On Monday, I will meet with President Trump in Washington DC, to discuss all of the details regarding ending the killing and the war. I am grateful for the invitation." European allies must be "involved at every stage to ensure reliable security guarantees together with America", he added.
Daily Mail
a minute ago
- Daily Mail
Selina Scott says she blames Sadiq Khan for her terrifying mugging, declaring 'he's got security - so why doesn't the public?'
Selina Scott has blamed London Mayor Sadiq Khan for her terrifying mugging after claiming he is not keeping people 'safe' in the capital. The veteran broadcast, 74, was left 'battered' and 'humiliated' after a gang of thieves assaulted her in broad daylight before stealing all her valuables outside a branch of Waterstones in Piccadilly in June. Seconds after leaving the shop, Ms Scott was struck on the back of her right knee, leaving her feeling as if she had been 'stabbed' and was quickly surrounded by a 'well dressed' group of seven or eight men and women. Within seconds they had managed to unzip her bag and make off with her wallet - containing all her cash and cards - as well as her driving licence, meaning she was forced to fend for herself and seek sanctuary. But the former ITN News At Ten anchor was shocked to find no police officers nearby to report the crime and was forced to walk home 'for several miles' still reeling from the traumatic ordeal. Officers then failed to attend a scheduled visit to her home the following day, citing a lack of available police cars. Met Police commissioner Sir Mark Rowley later apologised and admitted the force should have done better. Months on from the attack, Ms Scott remains frustrated over the supposed lack of safety in London and the Met's failure to robustly tackle such crimes, which have become 'rife' in the capital. But Ms Scott believes the brunt of the blame lies with London Mayor Sadiq Khan for failing to provide security teams like his own to members of the public. 'Sir Mark Rowley had the decency to apologise,' Ms Scott told The Telegraph. 'I actually blame the Mayor of London. More than I blame the police, actually, because the Mayor of London took on the job to keep the people of London safe, the police come under him. 'Everywhere you go there is security for well-known people, the Royal family have security. The Mayor of London has security. So what's different? Why doesn't the public have security? Why don't I get it?' Ms Scott said she would now carry a hidden 20 note on her when she ventures into central London and advised others to do the same. 'I would say to anyone walking through central London, put 20 quid in your shoe or down a sock or in your knickers or somewhere, because the worst thing was not having any money,' she said. Ms Scott has previously called for the London Mayor to step down in the wake her of terrifying mugging, claiming he has 'lost control of policing in London'. 'Sadiq Khan is now a knight of the realm, knights of the realm have a code of chivalry,' she told Good Morning Britain in June. 'It would be the honourable thing for him to do to step down and let someone else try and tackle this tsunami of crime. 'London is not the place you think it is. It's got lovely shops, it's got lovely exhibitions, it's got that great feeling, but there's this underbelly of danger. I am not going to the West End in a hurry again and I advise anyone else thinking about this to think twice.' Ms Scott previously told The Mail On Sunday how the terrifying assault - which took place on busy Piccadilly - left her 'shattered and traumatised'. She said she was attacked by 'around seven or eight' smartly dressed men and women, who appeared to be of East Asian origin. The broadcaster explained that she felt a sharp pain in the back of her leg after she was brutally hit moments after leaving the book shop. She then felt a tug on her shoulder as the thugs tried to wrench her bag away - before she was forced to engage in a tug-of-war with her assailant. With astonishing bravery given they were carrying what appeared to be a weapon, Ms Scott fought back and was able to keep hold of the bag – only for one of the practised thieves to deftly unzip it and remove her purse before running off. Ms Scott says she felt 'furious' at the lack of a police presence to deter or capture the criminals, despite being told by officers that such muggings were 'rife'. She told The Mail on Sunday: 'I'm mentally resilient and physically fit, but if they can attack me in such a brazen way they can attack anyone. You're left feeling not just traumatised but stupid that you have somehow let it happen. 'I'm also furious about the lack of police on our streets. No wonder the gang who set about me have a sense of impunity – they can do anything they want because they know no one will stop them.' Ms Scott did not require medical attention but suffered severe bruising to her leg in the assault. 'I am now only too relieved it wasn't a knife they used,' she said. Adding to her frustration, officers failed to attend a scheduled visit to her home the following day, citing a lack of available police cars. The incident has raised serious concerns about public safety and police presence in the heart of the capital. During a call-in on Nick Ferrari's show on LBC in June, Sir Mark Rowley admitted that the force could have given the broadcaster a better service in the wake of the attack. 'I can feel for her. She's obviously very upset. She's a 70-odd-year-old lady who had a very frightening experience,' he said. 'The officers weren't able to give the service that we would expect on that day. I'm sorry about that.' A Metropolitan Police spokesman previously said: 'While we understand that the victim in this case was frustrated that she couldn't see any police officers on the street at the time of the incident, we would like to reassure her and the wider public that a significant number of officers patrol the West End every day to target offenders, including those carrying out thefts and robberies. 'They patrol not just in uniform on foot, but also in plain clothes and in vehicles to have the best opportunity to identify and apprehend suspects. 'We would be happy to talk to the victim in this case to better understand her concerns.'
