My views on Syria

I have received hundreds of emails about the situation in Syria asking for my views on the government’s proposal that the UK should join coalition forces and undertake airstrikes in Syria. I am grateful to everyone who has got in touch to share their views, both for and against airstrikes and those who have thoughtfully set out the complexity of the decision and the finely balanced nature of the arguments.

I attended the Prime Minister’s statement on Syria in Parliament last week, participated fully in the discussions and debates within the Parliamentary Labour Party, have been briefed by senior military officers and have listened carefully to the views of all of the local residents who have contacted me about this matter.  I am writing to set out my views and my voting intention.

The conflict in Syria is complex and multi-faceted.  Bashar al-Assad has waged a war of destruction against his people, resulting in unimaginable pain, misery and loss.  250,000 Syrians have lost their lives and it is no surprise that many thousands more choose to risk a perilous journey across Europe in search of safety and security.  The highest level of correspondence I have received since being elected has been about the refugee crisis – huge numbers of constituents have contacted me to say that the UK should do more to help refugees and that the UK must take action to help bring stability to Syria.

A country which was once peaceful and prosperous, the home of an extraordinarily rich cultural heritage, has been terribly damaged by civil war.  The chaos has allowed ISIL (also known as Daesh) to gain territory in Syria, using the land and resources they control to fund a campaign of ideological warfare and international terror. Daesh is an entirely abhorrent organisation.  There can be nothing but condemnation for an organisation which beheads and crucifies people, uses rape as a weapon of war, persecutes religious and ethnic minorities, and perpetrates the dreadful atrocities we have recently seen in Paris, Beirut, Ankara and Sharm El Sheikh.

The international community’s failure to take united action to address the situation in Syria has led to a significant deterioration over the past four years.  I am clear that the UK has a responsibility within the wider international community to do more to address the crisis in Syria, and that there is an urgent need to act.  This includes engagement to persuade Russia to withdraw support from Bashar al-Assad and for a new national government of unity in Syria.

Whether or not to support military action is the gravest decision that any Member of Parliament has to take and must be taken with clear conviction. The key question in this instance is whether authorising UK airstrikes will lead to a peaceful resolution in Syria and increased security in the wider world, and whether this is the best way to support our neighbour and long term ally France. 

I listened very carefully to the Prime Minister’s statement last week.  I was glad that he spoke of the need for a comprehensive programme of action in relation to Syria, including a long term commitment to aid and reconstruction and to diplomatic efforts to replace Bashar al-Assad.  But there are important areas where I have serious concerns.

Diplomatic efforts to remove Bashar al-Assad as President of Syria, resolute efforts to cut off resources to Daesh, an international strategy to stem the ideological reach and growth of Daesh and to stop new recruits, and a continued commitment to international aid and reconstruction all form part of the approach which stands the best chance of a long-lasting peace for Syria. While the Prime Minister has highlighted the need for a comprehensive strategy I do not believe that he has identified all of the pieces of the jigsaw that are needed. There is a widely held view from many with extensive military experience that airstrikes are not the most effective way to defeat Daesh, and that bombing Raqqa would risk the lives of civilians.

The leadership of the Labour Party has agreed that there will be a free vote on the government’s proposals. For the reasons outlined above and having closely studied the government’s motion, I will be voting against UK airstrikes on Syria tomorrow.  I acknowledge that there are a range of views on this matter within the country and the Labour Party and I respect colleagues who, after careful consideration, are taking an alternative view. I sincerely hope that the debate is undertaken in a respectful manner that reflects the magnitude of the decision at hand.

I hope that this will be read in the spirit of sombre reflection in which it was written.  There will be consequences if Parliament votes for airstrikes, but there will also be important consequences for Syria if the international community fails to take effective action to tackle Daesh and to stop the fighting.  The current choice is being presented by many as a choice between action or inaction. I believe that there is a pressing need for action, but it must be the right course of action. 

I will vote against airstrikes tomorrow, but will press very hard for the UK to engage fully in a comprehensive strategy to achieve a peaceful resolution to the current conflict and for the long term reconstruction of Syria.

Showing 9 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Matheus Marques
    commented 2016-04-28 21:24:12 +0100
    A well-mounted with excellent information and a lot of cool stuff for you to read! Brasil Turis offers you various cupons de desconto in the Netshoes !
  • David Richard Jarvis
    commented 2015-12-03 05:11:51 +0000
    Thank you for understanding that not taking a specific action does not equate to taking no action. A basic logical fallacy that many in Parliament seem not to be aware of.My personal belief is that unless we first cut off Da’esh/ISIS from their sources of money and arms bombing can achieve nothing if it can’t be used to support well organised ground troops. Any equipment we destroy will simply be replaced, and any jihadi terrorists we kill will be replaced many times over. It will not degrade Da’esh/ISIS, it will strengthen them.
  • Ben Davidson
    commented 2015-12-02 18:39:34 +0000
    If you were asked to, how would you explain your decision to our allies and the UN who are requesting British assistance? I don’t think a couple of our 30 year old Tornadoes will make any difference but we need to be involved in the solution somehow. By voting no, you place yourself in the morally bankrupt but politically astute position of moral high ground without responsibility.
  • Ben Davidson
    followed this page 2015-12-02 18:39:31 +0000
  • Kevin York
    commented 2015-12-02 15:04:50 +0000
    Well done Helen!
  • Ben Taylor
    commented 2015-12-02 09:38:06 +0000
    Thank you for your compassion, and consideration.
  • Jack Waterhouse
    commented 2015-12-02 09:15:12 +0000
    Totally agree with you. Cameron has not put forward a convincing case. Simply bombing is not the answer to a horrendously complex situation.
  • Sophie Lambert
    commented 2015-12-01 17:11:19 +0000
    Thank you
  • Hilary Bedeman
    commented 2015-12-01 16:13:36 +0000
    Thank you Helen

    Please can you lobby the rest now.

    We are fed up with the red tories – we WILL oust them – let them know