Theresa May is to face protests outside parliament and anger from MPs in the Commons , despite her attempts to limit the fallout from her decision to sanction Britain’s involvement in airstrikes on Syria.
Wary of anger among MPs at being sidelined, the prime minister wrote to her parliamentary party explaining the action and published the government’s legal argument for intervention. However, anti-war protesters are already planning to demonstrate in Westminster and her failure to consult parliament on the airstrikes will see her face the ire of MPs when she addresses them on Monday.
Just hours after Jeremy Corbyn wrote to May demanding the publication of the legal case for the intervention, the government released the tests that had been applied before intervention took place. It appears to be an attempt by May to limit the concerns in parliament, including within her own party.
The paper argued that the UK had met three demands under international law. It said there was convincing evidence of extreme humanitarian distress; that there was no practicable alternative to the use of force; and that the action was necessary and proportionate.
It concluded: “In these circumstances, and as an exceptional measure on grounds of overwhelming humanitarian necessity, military intervention to strike carefully considered, specifically identified targets in order effectively to alleviate humanitarian distress by degrading the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons capability and deterring further chemical weapons attacks was necessary and proportionate and therefore legally justifiable.”
May also set out the case in a letter to Tory MPs. However, the note made no promises about the consultation of parliament. Some Conservatives, including veteran Ken Clarke, had previously broken cover to say that MPs should be given a vote.
With May emphasising that the military action would be strictly limited, Tories look like they will back away from causing problems for their leader. Should opposition MPs find a way to engineer a vote, it also appears likely that May would have had a majority in parliament for action, with the DUP offering their support as well as some Labour MPs. However, many of the Labour MPs who instinctively back the action are frustrated at the failure to recall parliament before action was taken.
The strikes drew support from some non-political quarters. The London-based foreign policy thinktank, the Henry Jackson Society, praised May for “taking resolute action” that would help deter further use of chemical weapons. However, executive director Alan Mendoza said the airstrikes should be the start of a wider military campaign, instead of action the US has described as a “one-time shot.”
Others were less enthusiastic, with the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament describing the action as defying international law and criticising May for bypassing parliament. General secretary Kate Hudson said: “They will only increase the likelihood of this terrible conflict spilling over into the wider Middle East and potentially beyond that.
“May has also disregarded public opinion in launching these strikes; polls indicate that only 22% of the population support this bombing campaign. Diplomatic and political solutions must be sought.”
Hudson’s criticism was quickly followed by a statement from the Stop the War Coalition, which Corbyn once chaired, with the group claiming that most Britons were against such strikes. “In sanctioning killing at the behest of Donald Trump, May deliberately avoided consulting parliament and risked dramatically widening the war,” it said.
“The overwhelming majority of people in this country oppose this action just as they have opposed the series of wars of the last seventeen years.” The group said it would be protesting outside Parliament on Monday.
Meanwhile, in Syria, various community and civil society groups have called on the US and Europe to develop a comprehensive strategy to deter future atrocities by Assad’s forces. Fadel Abdul Ghany of the Syrian Network for Human Rights said: “The US, France and UK have sent an important message that Assad’s days of gassing Syrian civilians with impunity are over.”
Dr Zaher Sahloul, president of Med Global, founded last year by doctors to address the health needs of the most vulnerable,, said: “Without a larger strategy today’s actions will not change Assad’s calculus – to the contrary, they could make the humanitarian situation worse.”
