Cheadle and Gatley Lib Dems are moving
Your Lib Dem team for Cheadle West & Gatley Learn more
by Lib Dem team on 4 December, 2015
On the night of the Syria debate I missed out on hearing Hilary Benn’s speech and instead paid a visit to my local mosque. Evening prayers had just finished and I sat in a room at the back with Dr Haytham Alhamwi,Director of Rethink Rebuild Society – “the voice of the Syrian Community of Manchester”.
Tempting as it was to discuss the rights and wrongs of the UK bombing campaign, we didn’t. It was clear that the vote would be won in Parliament. We were more interested in what happens next.
Whether you think that the UK joining the international bombing campaign in Syria is a good thing or a terrible mistake, we all want to get the best outcome. But what would that outcome look like?
We all know the situation in Syria is confusing, and I certainly didn’t leave the mosque with a perfect understanding – nothing like it. But over a coffee and a chocolate biscuit, I gained a much better grasp of what Dr Alhamwi’s organisation – and others like it who want to see a peaceful, democratic Syria – believe needs to happen.
Don’t give up on democracy
We saw western attempts to bring about democratic states in Afganistan and Iraq falter. We saw the Arab Spring burn brightly then sputter out. But, Dr Alhamwi argues, Syria can be transformed into a democracy. It won’t happen on its own, but it can be done.
Don’t forget Assad
We in the West are, very understandably, most concerned about Daesh – they pose the bigger threat to us and we hear far more about them. If you lived in Syria, you would probably be a lot more worried about Assad. He has killed far more people than Daesh, has driven many more out of their homes, and continues to wage war on those calling for a democratic state. He has the support of Russia and Iran. Without that foreign support Assad’s position would be far weaker. With it he remains a threat and must be forced out of power.
The 70,000 troops on the ground exist, but…
These 70,000 troops there’s been so much discussion about really exist, says Dr Alhamwi. OK, we can debate the exact numbers, but they are out there: the Free Syrian Army. What they don’t have is the equipment they need. Or the training. Or the coherence to work together as a united fighting force. They are being bombed by the Russians, attacked by both Assad and ISIS. There are FSA troops who, faced with fighting a war without ammunition, are defecting to ISIS. It’s better than death. We can support them with training, leadership, equipment (including weapons and ammunition) and protect them from being bombed from the sky by Assad and Russia.
Help Syrians, don’t victimise them
Dr Alhamwi worries about moderate Syrians being driven away by the policies of western governments. He urges the West to do more to enable humanitarian aid work in Syria, to support Syrian refugees, to stop banks like HSBC closing people’s bank accounts simply because they are Syrian and to cease the routine stopping and questioning of Syrian residents entering the UK. This is challenging for any government, with the fear of letting a terrorist slip through the net surely high in the minds of ministers, but perhaps some progress can be made.
All of these issues are important if we want to build a peaceful, democratic and united Syria. Although I can’t say if a UK bombing campaign will help or hinder, it seems to me that – with or without UK bombing – these issues remain important, they can be tackled and our objective can be achieved.
9 Comments
Ian,
I appreciate these arguments but it’s still disappointing that Tim Farron voted for the bombing. Instead of putting innocent civilians lives at risk, we should start putting pressure on nations like Saudi Arabia to stop funding ISIS, as well as using British-made bombs on Yemen. I think David Davis (an anti-bombing Tory) was the only speaker to mention Saudi Arabia, the real obstacle for peace in the Middle East.
This is so much evidence (read Patrick Cockburn in the Independent) that the 70,000 moderate ground troops in Syria is pie-in-the-sky.
Regards,
Martin
I’d generally agree with Martin’s sentiments here, particularly as all but a few seem to agree that air strikes have minimal effect on what is effectively a a very dispersed armed militia.
Now, if there was a realistic ground force who could progressively taek and hold territory, then yes air support would be vital to that advance. But that 70,000 strong force has already been described as the “bogus battalions”. What will be needed is a credible attack force of troops from the region. At that point, I will be content to support RAF involvement.
After the tragic mess of Iraq, and the absence of law and order that ultimately lead to daesh, I thibk it’s time the world community came together and work on the ground in Syria, if Syria fails we will all be much worse off for it. Bombing has not resolved the conflicts in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, if anything it has made things worse. Let’s all work together towards a better future for this planet.
I am currently reading Max Hasting’s Bomber Command. It is about the British Bombing campaign against Germany.
It is clear that in 1939-1942 that bombing Germany was useless, (few crews got within 5 miles of the target). The Airforce new and so did the politicians, but we had to be seen to be doing something – sounds familiar?
It is meant to type ‘knew’ and not ‘new’ – I tyope to qickly
I have no fear of Assad, and I think the West should keep it nose out.
Every time we interfere we mess it up, who are we to say what is right or wrong in Syria and who are the good and the bad guys?
I only know one Syrian couple, who live in the UK, they are pro-Assad and can’t understand why the West demonises him.
As with everyone else here we go again, and for all those who voted for bombing. The attack on the underground is only the begging now i am sure we will now have an episode like Paris and it will be on Cameron and those who voted heads. I also know a Syrian couple near me a doctor they cannot understand why we are getting involved.
Why have we not learnt from Iraq. Aftganistan, Libya,we may not like these despots but they keep the lid on things all we do is open the stable door etc in fighting, refugees, and alienating immigrants over here.
As for you Liberals its just another let down as far as i am concerned and has stopped me voting anymore, i refer to 1 Tuition Fees 2 closing Remploy workshops as none of the disabled are not back in work, 3 and now the bombing
Take care out there now folks Dave of Gatley
I certainly don’t know the answer. But it probably isn’t bombing. Sadly we were already a target for a terrorist attack as we have been bombing Daesh in Iraq for over 12 months.
Somewhat surprised to see such a topic discussed on a local forum.
However, interesting to hear the views of Dr Alhamwi’s who has direct experience of this nightmare.
In terms of go forward the article does not really say very much. Yes democracy would be nice but is to say the least extremely unlikely. In this regard I listened to a BBC discussion on what the Arab Spring did – several people phoned in to support Assad saying they had lived in Damascus as English Christians and it was a paradise until the Arab Spring and Assad was very tolerant of their beliefs followed by a bloodbath causing them to leave. So I don’t know – in any case he’s staying for a considerable period as Russia (who have troops on the ground) have made this quite clear.
I don’t know the answer either but don’t agree we should cower and not do anything because because of fear of the consequences – that’s what Islamic State want.
NB Daesh according to the Daily Mirror is an acronym for the Arabic phrase al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant).
Essentially, it’s another word for ISIS/ISIL – but apparently one that ISIS militants do not favour.
Why? Because it is similar to the Arabic words ‘Daes’, ‘one who crushes something underfoot’ and ‘Dahes’, translated as ‘one who sows discord’.