Following the chemical mass murder of civilians by the Syrian government, this week our Parliament ruled out any prospect of striking against Bashar Assad and his Baathist regime.
A coalition government motion had sought to establish the principle of using legal and proportionate force to deter further use of chemical weapons. Labour MPs voted against this motion, along with a smattering of disloyal Conservatives and Lib Dems.
Assad’s forces recently murdered more than 1,000 people with nerve gas; mostly civilians, many children. This was boldest of more than a dozen such attacks over the last year. No international player seriously believes that the regime did not do this – no one except the leaders of autocratic countries like Iran, Russia and China.
It is important to respect the range of views on how to respond to this atrocity. It is right and necessary to question the objectives and limits of military action. Of course, a strike guarantees nothing and carries risks. But this is also true of inaction. My view is that the absence of military retaliation will embolden the Syrian regime, making further attacks more likely, potentially on a larger scale. Previous chemical attacks have tested the water – “can we get away with it?” So far Assad has.
Labour Leader Ed Miliband gave public and private indications that he would support a limited strike against Assad. He then changed his mind and set hoops to be jumped through before action could be taken, and in response, the Prime Minister amended the government motion in the hope of keeping Parliament united. Miliband then changed his mind again and ordered Labour to vote against the motion anyway. Could there be a clearer indication of this man’s weakness and inadequacy? History will record that the Labour Party used the first chemical weapon atrocity of the 21st century to seek political advantage and appease a dictator who murders civilians with poison gas.
Britain must now refocus upon what it can to support innocent people in Syria. There is much work to be done to provide humanitarian assistance for ordinary people facing depravities we hoped to leave behind in the last century.