I understand the sentiments of what happened in Paris. Though not proven, I also understand that the barbaric, utmost condemnable act of murdering innocent French citizens could even have been committed by Syrian terrorists.
That still does not give Cameron and the UK government the permission to airstrike Syria.
If Cameron thinks that he could use this opportunity to boast bombing yet another foreign country during his tenure, even by ignoring his own conservative-dominated Foreign Affair’s Committee’s warning against attacking Syria, the Prime Minister is completely wrong.
If the parliament votes in favour, and RAF goes ahead with airstrike in Syria, that is considered terrorism by a country against another’s sovereignty. The airstrikes will be a violation of Syria’s airspace, and hence illegal in UN terms.
The case is same, whether US or France bomb Syria.
The obvious next question is: how Russian and Iran bombings are justified?
It is not. If you ask me, bombing is not a solution for a political crisis. A political crisis could be resolved only by a political solution. That is the only amicable way.
That said, Russia and Iran could argue that their airstrikes are legal and comply with UN rules.
Per UN books, Assad Government is still the recognized Syrian government. Agree Assad is not the best, but he is still trying to keep terrorism out of Syria. It is his recognized government who formally invited Russia and Iran to assist Syria from internal and external threats.
Any other strikes, by any other un-invited nation, is purely illegal; period.
UK should be careful not to get carried away and walk in to yet another war. We should have learned our lessons from Iraq and Libya. Just barging in and bombing will not bring peace to any country. That is just school-bully mentality; which is what most of the actions of Cameron and his Chancellor could be attributed to.
Let us keep legalities aside for time being. As mentioned earlier, bombing is not a solution for a political crisis. A political crisis could be resolved only by a political solution. That is the only amicable way.
I agree with Jeremy Corbyn’s stand on this topic. There should not be a vote for airstrike in Syria. If one is orchestrated by Cameron, then the Parliament should defeat the motion. We as a country should try to learn from past. Iraq might have been a mistake, but Libya should not have happened. Syria should be no-no.
Instead of bombing, UK should help UN to speak out loudly and confidently. UK should divert all its efforts to re-instate the lost power of UN – which is currently completely ignored and side-lined by war-loving US and its allies.
That is what UK should be aiming for; and if succeeded, that is something Cameron could really be proud of.
What is your opinion?