Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Well, that's that

We are going to send the RAF to Syria and strike ISIS territory. The House of Commons debated the issue for most of the day and voted 397 to 223 to authorize those airstrikes. The majority was bigger than many expected. The House of Lords also debated it but, as in 2013, did not divide, merely expressed its mood, which was supportive of the government.

I find myself in a quandary. As I made it clear yesterday, I do not think this is a very good idea. There is no need to go through the arguments again as they are all here. At the moment I prefer not to think about what will happen when the first pictures, helpfully produced by ISIS, of children killed by allied bombs are published.

On the other hand, there is the opposition to the air strikes: the Stop The War Coalition, the people who earnestly assure me that war has never solved anything (I usually suggest that they have a word with people who remember being liberated from the Nazis), the dopy academics one of whom shared a programme on the BBC Russian Service earlier today and whose idea was to try to get a global consensus through the UN, and the screaming, ullulating mob outside Parliament today. As I was leaving the Palace of Westminster about half an hour before the vote was due I saw resigned looks on the faces of the police officers. Whichever way the vote goes, one of them said, there will be trouble. Added to that we have the stories published in various media outlets, even left-wing ones of threats against Labour MPs who had voiced their intentions to vote with the government on the subject and abuse against their staff (a particularly despicable kind of behaviour) and one's convictions begin to waver.

For what it is worth, I still think that we are making a mistake but I can understand that we have placed ourselves in an almost impossible position - we need to solve the Syrian crisis if for no other reason than to stem the flood of migrants but we have no idea how to do it. Getting rid of ISIS, if we can do it, may be the first step towards a solution but my doubts remains.

Perversely though, I am glad that the holier-than-thou rabble did not win.

9 comments:

  1. It sounds like a spectacularly bad idea. Is it really any business of Britain's who rules Syria? Britain is not an imperial power any longer. Maybe Britain should avoid diving into quagmires that are not its concern?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With the large Muslim diaspora in Western Europe, including this country, this is local politics. As their numbers increase in the years to come it will become eve more so. This is an old article but gives you a flavour of how these communities never really lose the identity of where they come from, see also Tebbit's cricket test.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8655697.stm

      It's a bit like the old Irish joke when you ask for directions. The reply comes "Well I wouldn't start from here". But not only are we starting from a bad place I'm not sure we even know where we're trying to get.

      Delete
    2. And there is the problem of the migrants who are now coming to Europe, including Britain in very large numbers. There is no question that some kind of a stability in Syria is of first importance to us all. I remain agnostic about this particular method but, sadly, cannot think of another one. Nor am I impressed by the more organized opponents.

      Delete
    3. There is no question that some kind of a stability in Syria is of first importance to us all.

      I agree wholeheartedly. I am however very dubious as to whether the Americans want that. It might be preferable to let the Russians sort it out. They're a good deal more sensible than the Americans. But then everyone is more sensible than the Americans.

      Delete
    4. Anyone who thinks that Russians are interested in stability has not been paying attention. Anyone who thinks everyone is more sensible than the Americans lives in a parallel universe.

      Delete
    5. Well if you can name one American foreign policy initiative in the Middle East in the past few decades that has actually worked...

      Delete
    6. I believe your comment was that everyone is more sensible than the Americans. The onus of that particular proof with examples of wonderfully well thought out foreign policy efforts by various countries is on you.

      Delete
  2. The UK was already at war with ISIS in Iraq. To be consistent, anyone opposed to the extension of the war to Syrian should have been opposed to UK operations in Iraq. Where were the frothing Corbyn supporters a couple of months ago?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The word "extension", of some importance in this case, seems to have been missed by a number of people.

      Delete