Re: Kerry Says Chemical Arms Attack in Syria Is ‘Undeniable’
Britain's armed forces are drawing up plans for military action in Syria.
David Cameron is considering a 'proportionate response' to the 'absolutely abhorrent' chemical weapons attack that killed up to 1,200 last week, Downing Street has said.
Using Twitter the Prime Minister also announced that Parliament would be recalled four days early, on Thursday, to debate the Syrian crisis, followed by a vote by MPs on what action to take.
Politicians have started speculating if a British attack is agreed it could be launched as early as Friday or over the weekend.
Britain's armed forces draw up plans for military action in Syria as foreign minister says the country will defend itself using 'all means available'
- PM considering 'proportionate response' to 'abhorrent' chemical attack
- David Cameron has recalled Parliament for Thursday and has promised vote
- Tony Blair says he should consider 'consequence of inaction and shudder'
- MPs want military action to have their backing in binding Commons vote
- Strikes would be in retaliation for last week's chemical weapons attack
- Syrian foreign minister today denied 'utterly and completely' state did it
By Martin Robinson
27 August 2013
Daily Mail
Britain's armed forces are drawing up plans to launch a military attack on Syria, it was revealed today.
David Cameron is considering a 'proportionate response' to the 'absolutely abhorrent' chemical weapons attack that killed up to 1,200 last week, Downing Street has said.
Using Twitter the Prime Minister also announced that Parliament would be recalled four days early, on Thursday, to debate the Syrian crisis, followed by a vote by MPs on what action to take.
Politicians have started speculating if an attack is agreed it could be launched as early as Friday or over the weekend.
But the tyrannical al-Assad regime has warned it will fight back with 'all means available' and its foreign secretary said firing missiles into the country to help rebels in their war with the state is 'delusional'.
Threat: David Cameron, pictured arriving at No 10 this morning, is considering whether to take 'proportionate' military action against Syria in response to the chemical weapons attack last week
Message: David Cameron has revealed this lunchtime that Parliament would be called back four days early and vote on what action Britain will take
A decision on whether to fire missiles into Syria could be taken before the results of a report by UN weapons inspectors into the attack is produced.
Downing Street said all options were still on the table adding they wanted to 'deter' al-Assad from using more chemical weapons.
'Any decision taken will be taken under a strict international framework. Any use of chemical weapons is completely and utterly abhorrent and unacceptable and the international community needs to respond to that,' Mr Cameron's official spokesman said.
'No decision has yet been taken. We are continuing to discuss with our international partners what the right response should be, but, as part of this, we are making contingency plans for the armed forces'.
Business: Chancellor George Osborne and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg arrive at No 10 to speak to the PM today
Crisis talks: Foreign Secretary William Hague is also at No 10 as the Armed Forces began to draw up plans to attack Syria if needed
It came as former Prime Minister Tony Blair compared the violent Bashar al-Assad regime to the 'dark days of Saddam'.
Mr Blair, who took Britain to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, said this morning that it is 'time we took sides'.
Call to arms: Tony Blair today urged David Cameron to back military intervention in Syria to avoid a 'nightmare scenario' for the West in the Middle East
'People wince at the thought of intervention. But contemplate the future consequence of inaction and shudder,' he wrote in The Times.
This morning David Cameron returned early from his Cornish holiday to consider whether to recall Parliament.
MPs are demanding a binding vote over plans to launch missile strikes on Syria without the backing of the United Nations.
But Mr Blair, whose views appear to be out of step with current Labour MPs, urged the Government to ignore 'the impulse to stay clear of turmoil'.
'I understand every impulse to stay clear of the turmoil, to watch but not to intervene, to ratchet up language but not to engage in the hard, even harsh business of changing reality on the ground.
'But we have collectively to understand the consequences of wringing our hands instead of putting them to work.
'I hear people talking as if there was nothing we could do: the Syrian defence systems are too powerful, the issues too complex, and in any event, why take sides since they're all as bad as each other?
'But others are taking sides. They're not terrified of the prospect of intervention. They're intervening. To support an assault on civilians not seen since the dark days of Saddam.
'It is time we took a side: the side of the people who want what we want; who see our societies for all their faults as something to admire; who know that they should not be faced with a choice between tyranny and theocracy.'
Mr Blair is now the Middle East peace envoy for the US, Russia, the EU and the United Nations, and said allowing the enduring controversy over the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 to hold back military intervention in Syria could help produce a 'nightmare scenario' for the West in the Middle East.
Tyrant: President Bashar al-Assad speaking with journalists from a Russian newspaper in Damascus, Syria
Talks: Prime Minister David Cameron (right) is expected to hold a second telephone call with US President Barack Obama (left) within the next 48 hours to finalise plans for military action (file picture)
Threat: The United States and Britain are armed with long-range Tomahawk missiles that can be used in an attack on Syria
Syrian foreign minister Walid Muallem denied 'utterly and completely' that state forces had been behind the attack.
Summit: Foreign Secretary William Hague arrives at 10 Downing Street for a meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron this morning
At a press conference in Damascus, he said:
'They said that the Syrian forces, the Syrian army are the ones who did this attack.
'I deny it utterly and completely.
'There is no country in the world who would use an ultimate destruction weapon against his own people'.
Speaking about the threat of attack by Britain or America he added: 'If the purpose of a possible (foreign) military strike is to achieve a balance of power ... it's delusional and not at all possible,'
Mr Muallem claimed that the regime had not attempted to obstruct weapons inspectors from visiting the site while evidence was still fresh.
'We didn't argue about the site they wanted to go to. We agreed immediately. There's no delay.'
The Prime Minister is expected to announce that Parliament will be recalled this week to debate plans by Britain, France and the United States to launch strikes against Syria in retaliation for last week’s barbaric chemical weapons attack.
Sources said David Cameron was ‘likely’ to give way to demands from Tory MPs, Lib Dems and Labour to allow the Commons to have a ‘say’ on the crisis before any attack is launched.
But despite a growing domestic backlash over the prospect of intervention, it was unclear whether MPs will be given a binding vote.
Russia and Syria both raised the prospect of dire consequences if the West launches attacks without a UN mandate.
US Secretary of State John Kerry called last week’s attack a ‘moral obscenity’, but Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assad warned: ‘Failure awaits the United States as in all previous wars it has unleashed, starting with Vietnam and up to the present day.’
And experts insisted that any attack could be illegal without UN authorisation – leaving British ministers and military commanders open to war crimes charges.
MPs last night said it was vital that any military action had their backing in a binding Commons vote.
Response: United Nations chemical weapons experts meet residents at one of the sites of an alleged poison gas attack in the south-western Damascus suburb of Mouadamiya
Former Lib Dem leader Sir Menzies Campbell said it was ‘inconceivable’ that any attack would be launched before UN weapons inspectors have reported back and ‘Parliament has met, discussed and voted on the issue’.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg's Lib Dems are also believed to back a Commons vote, as does Labour. But some ministers are wary of setting a precedent and insist the Government must have the ‘flexibility’ to respond swiftly to events without recourse to Parliament.
With polls showing the public is wary of any intervention in Syria’s bloody civil war, many Tory MPs also demanded a vote.
Tory Andrew Bridgen, who co-ordinated a letter to Mr Cameron signed by 81 Conservative MPs demanding a say on Syria, said MPs had previously been assured they would get ‘a debate and a substantive vote’ before action is taken.
He said ministers should now honour their promise, adding: ‘We live in a parliamentary democracy, not a brutal dictatorship. The letter was specifically about arming the rebels but also about any further escalation of the crisis.’
Tory MP Sarah Wollaston said a debate and vote were essential to air widespread public concerns about intervention in Syria.
She added: ‘I sense that we are on a headlong rush into escalating this conflict and I think Parliament can act as a natural brake to that.’
Fellow Tory Douglas Carswell also said it would be ‘unacceptable’ for Mr Cameron to launch military action without the approval of Parliament.
Mr Carswell pointed out that in opposition Mr Cameron had called for curbs on the power of the prime minister to prevent military action without
Parliamentary approval.
He added: ‘If the case for military involvement in Syria is as strong as those at the top of this Government seem to believe, they will have no difficulty in coming to the House of Commons and making their case.’
WE HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO ATTACK SYRIA, CLAIMS HAGUE
Britain and the United States could attack Syria without the backing of the United Nations, William Hague claimed yesterday – despite warnings it would breach international law.
The British Foreign Secretary said the impasse on the UN Security Council caused by Russia’s support for Syria would not prevent the West retaliating against the use of chemical weapons.
A similar argument was used when Britain and the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.
Attorney-General Dominic Grieve has been asked to draw up a legal case for military strikes, which will be presented at a meeting of the National Security Council tomorrow.
Russia said bypassing the UN to attack Syria would be a ‘grave violation of international law’. And legal experts warned that intervening without a UN mandate would be ‘very difficult’.
But Mr Hague insisted any action would be legal. He said: ‘Whatever we do will be in accordance with international law and will be based on legal advice to the National Security Council and to the Cabinet.
'So, is it possible to act on chemical weapons, is it possible to respond to chemical weapons without complete unity on the UN Security Council? I would argue, yes, it is.
'It is possible to take action based on great humanitarian need and humanitarian distress – it’s possible to do that under many different scenarios.’
But others disagreed. Former ambassador Oliver Miles said he ‘did not understand’ Mr Hague’s argument, adding: ‘There is not any legal basis that I am aware of, apart from self-defence – and this clearly is not that.’
Michael Caplan, a barrister specialising in international law, said it was ‘very difficult’ to make a legal case for intervention without a UN mandate.
‘There is no threat to the security of this country or the United States so on what basis could we intervene?’
