William Hague set out the government’s latest thinking on the horror in Syria to MPs in the Commons today. He explained that if the UK were to consider arming the rebels, it would be under three conditions:
- A decision in co-ordination with other nations.
- Carefully controlled circumstances.
- In accordance with obligations under national and international law.
Hague said:
‘The EU should give strong support to this diplomatic process, including by agreeing further amendments to the arms embargo, without taking any decisions at present to send arms to the Syrian opposition.
‘The case for further amendments to the arms embargo on Syria is compelling, in order to increase the pressure on the regime, and to give us the flexibility to respond to continued radicalisation and conflict. We have to be open to every way of strengthening moderates and saving lives rather than the current trajectory of extremism and murder.’
He added that changes to the arms embargo are ‘not separate from the diplomatic work, but essential to it’. But how wise would arming the rebels be? In the Spectator this week, former ambassador to Syria Andrew Green warns that doing so would ‘pour petrol’ on a fire. He writes:
Even if the opposition were in the ascendant, it would be in no position to restore control over the country, let alone peace. The civilian leadership is hopelessly divided, unable even to set up a government in exile. They have no strong links to the fighters on the ground, who already view them with some contempt. As the regime weakens, the power of the extremists in the armed resistance will increase. Already the al-Nusra Front, the jihadists, are gaining respect and support by their bravery in battle and their rejection of corruption.
Meanwhile, the Israelis, who are watching nervously, have let it be known that the purpose of their recent air raids was to prevent the supply of sophisticated rockets to Assad’s Hezbollah allies in Lebanon. They would do well to leave it at that. Would they really prefer chaos on their northern border?
We should ask ourselves the same question. Why pour petrol on these flames? Instead we should aim to wind down the war by restricting the supply of weapons to all sides and we should redouble our efforts at humanitarian assistance. We should also firmly back the Russian proposal for an early conference to pick up the threads of previous attempts at negotiation. The alternative is indeed ‘too ghastly to contemplate’.
You can read the full piece here.
As the call for intervention grows louder, The Spectator are hosting a debate on this topic, with speakers including Halla Diyab, the Syrian film-maker and womens’ rights activist, journalist Douglas Murray, and former ambassador to Syria, Andrew Green. For more information and tickets, visit: http://specc.ie/14p7m1v
Comments