What will it take before the UK decides to supply the Syrian rebels with arms? Many are cautious about whether this measure would really make the conflict any better, but William Hague has made it clear that he believes there is a strong case for at least threatening to do so. Further evidence of chemical weapons usage by the regime against the Syrian people suggested again this week that the ‘red line’ for action has definitely been crossed, but today Number 10 tried to spell out the thinking behind an apparent delay in acting.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said that the decision to not renew the EU arms embargo was part of a ‘very clear, concerted approach that is designed to send a clear and unambiguous signal to the Assad regime. There is at least… 80,000 people have died, millions of people have been displaced, as I said horrific suffering. It has to be brought to an end and that is why we are pursuing the approach that we are.’
He added that while there was a ‘growing body of persuasive evidence that the regime has used and continues to use chemical weapons’, what was ‘now needed is this independent UN investigation that establishes the facts’ and that ‘it is very important that the Assad regime should co-operate with that investigation’.
MPs continue to press for a debate should the UK decide, once there is sufficient evidence from that investigation, to arm the rebels. But the question ministers need to answer is what evidence there is that supplying arms will bring an end to the horrific suffering? This week’s Spectator warns that we have yet to hear the compelling argument for ‘thinking that intervention would stop rather than accelerate the cycle of violence’. Our leading article (which you can read in print and online from tomorrow) says:
‘If the European Union allows arms to pour into Syria – directed at the ‘good’ rebels, of course, – what will prevent Putin from equipping Assad with even better weapons? Mr Cameron was quite right in saying that the arms embargo has ‘served the extremists on both sides’. But a lifted arms embargo would do the same, to worse effect.’
The next Spectator Debate on 24 June will be debating the motion ‘Assad is a war criminal. The West must intervene in Syria’ with Malcolm Rifkind, Andrew Green, Douglas Murray and more. Click here to book tickets.
Comments