No, the people of Syria should not be expected to wait for the next election

“If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want national policy based on what we know in our hearts as morally right. We cannot defy our security … by committing an immorality so great by saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, ‘Give up your dreams of freedom, because to save our own skins, we were willing to do a deal with your slave-masters’.” – President Ronald Reagan

We have reached the point in the Syrian crisis and Donald Trump’s absolute requirement to take his citizens’ eyes off his failures at home in which, for the wrong reasons, Mr Trump has taken a unilateral move of signalling the beginning of the end for the Assad regime.

Here at home, our Government’s response to the missile launch has been lackluster; we are, apparently, not to get involved. This is a repeat of the consistent mistakes that have been made by politicians in this country, who have been in desperate election mode since 2013.

What is becoming increasingly clear is that the current government has no intention to act in any further military or operational way. This to me spells one thing: an early general election.

Marginal seat Members of Parliament are, once again, bombarding their constituents with election literature. This is happening pretty much everywhere. There happens, of course, to be local elections in many seats, but if anyone knows of any marginal MP who isn’t doing this at the moment, please do feel free to comment. It just so happens also that many of these MPs or candidates are publicly anti-Syrian interventionism.

Jeremy Corbyn’s statement on Syria was about the least offensive thing that he could say to his hard-liners, and those who he needs to ensure that Labour are not completely obliterated in the coming election. These aren’t words of any real sentiment; in fact, Mr Corbyn is well-known for supporting terrorists both here and abroad. What is happening here instead is that he is taking the chicken approach to foreign policy: He quite literally cannot state who he privately supports, because that would cost him his job, and for some reason, he does not view that prospect as a bad thing for the Labour Party or the country.

What’s quite clear is that Mr Trump, in reality, probably should not be permitted to do this alone. I don’t particularly wish to wait for any United Nations resolution – because, quite frankly, given Russia and China, one will not be forthcoming. If I had it my way, we’d have voted the right way in 2013. Sadly, Parliament did not.

Perhaps Mrs May, in advance of calling an early election, might decide to appoint a strategist, as opposed to a joke of a tactician who accidentally won a referendum, to deal with this situation. The lives of millions of Syrians may just depend on it.

What follows from here may be no further significant developments, especially given Russia’s insistence that if the US press ahead, there will be trouble. It may prove insurmountable, but with ISIS in retreat and Assad now directly threatened, it is blatantly obvious that we have a duty to ensure that power vacuum does not emerge, so that a coalition can support the citizens of Syria, as opposed to killing them.

In the coming weeks, there may be a chance for the Government to accept that this is required. We need to advance in defence of our values, our red lines, and in order make it clear to him and all those in the region that we will not accept human beings living in misery, slavery and isolation.

 

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*