A Letter to UK Parliament – ‘Stop This Dirty War in Syria’
Dear Right Honourable Men and Women,
I am writing you to ask that you vote ‘NO’ during Wednesday’s House of Commons vote on the UK’s military bombing of Syria.
This same war vote failed back in August 2013 for the very same reasons it should fail in November 2015. Such a war would be illegal under International Law. To date, no member of the US-led “Anti-ISIL Coalition” has actually acted legally by intervening in Syria, and are all in clear violation of International Law. Moreover, any case for intervention by the Coalition fails because any nation who has a open foreign policy which directly contributes to destabilisingSyria (training, funding and arming a violent insurgency) – should never be allowed to declare anew war which they claim will somehow solve the same problem of destabilisation. In other words, the same toxic foreign policy that caused the problem in the first place should not be put forward as the solution to it.
Before anyone can rightly debate the merits of any military action in Syria, there should first be a Parliamentary inquiry into the activities, clandestine or otherwise, of all members of the US-led ‘Anti-ISIL Coalition’ in order to determine who is doing what in terms of arming, funding, training, smuggling, and general colluding with armed insurgents – moderate, or terrorist (is there any difference?) on the ground in Syria, as well as in ‘safe havens’ in neighbouring Turkey and Jordan. The facts are very clear – almost every leading member of the US-led ‘Coalition’ has at some juncture supplied either cash, weapons, or military training to the very same terrorist fighters (including al Nusra Front and ISIS) which they are now claiming to be fighting against.
On record, the worst offenders in facilitating the terrorist conclave in both Syria and Northern Iraq are as follows: Turkey (weapons, cash, black market oil transit, training terrorists, terrorist safe haven, human trafficking), Saudi Arabia (lots of cash, weapons), Qatar (lots of cash,weapons), France (weapons to al Nusra), United States (weapons to al Nusra and ISIS, supplies to ISIS, cash, logistical support, training), Jordan (training terrorists, terrorist safe haven), and even Israel (weapons, medical treatment and safe haven for al Nusra fighters), to name only a few.
Shockingly, there are also a number of troubling reports implicating the son of the Turkish president Erdogan in financing ISIS. Turkey is a NATO ally. Clearly, we have a major problem here. Who in the west will address it?
Regrettably, Britain should probably be included on this list too. Why is British Foreign Officefunding certain Syrian ‘charities’ with direct links to al Nusra terrorist fighting groups? In addition, it appears that certain British oil companies are very much invested in sustaining ISIS black market oil sales by way of the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq and Turkish military intelligence (MIT), all of whom have cooperated in cross-border oil smuggling operations, including the supply of arms to terrorist groups. One example is British oil firm, Genel Energy, who is contracted by the KRG to supply oil for a major Kurdish firm that has been accused of facilitating ISIS oil sales through Turkey. See a full report on this story here:
The case is overwhelming. What we have here is a very dirty and covert war that’s being waged in Syria.
Too much evidence is now available for elected officials to simply claim ignorance, and a failure to address these, as well as consider historic links between western intelligence agencies and al Qaeda terrorists and ISIS today, and more importantly, to come clean regarding the systematic pattern of collusion between members of the ‘Anti-ISIL Coalition’ and terrorist brigades on the ground in Syria – only invites a continuation of the violence.
MPs must understand that there is no legal basis to go to war under International Law – not under Article 51 of the UN Charter, nor under the recent UN Security Council Resolution 2249. Neither provides for the a lawful military operation in in Syria. If there was any possibility that either Article 51 or UNSCR 2249 could be spun to justify a ‘legalish’ military intervention in Syria, that scant option was neutered on Oct 1, 2015 when Russia legally entered the conflict by invitation of the Syrian state, in order to help flush out the terrorist insurgency.
Recently, Prime Minister David Cameron has claimed that there are 70,000 “moderate” rebel Free Syria Army fighters (FSA), “ready to coordinate on the ground with a western air campaign.” This is an imaginative, wishful and fanciful depiction of the reality on the ground, as proven by many admissions by US military experts who admit that, ‘the FSA no longer exists.’ How could the prime minister make such a wild statement and expect to be seen as either credible or informed on this important issue? This does not inspire confidence.
Once again, the only ‘legal’ option for Britain, or any other member of the extrajudicial ‘Coalition’, would be either by an explicit UN Security Council Resolution, or by request of the sovereign nation-state of Syria. By simply repeating hyperbolic political mantras like, “Assad must go”, or “Assad has no legitimacy of his own people”, “Assad has crossed the red line”, does not disqualify the Syrian government as the internationally recognised government who sits in the United Nations. To assume otherwise is nothing more than cheap ‘cracker jack’ diplomacy by politicians who are fixated on regime change and not at all interested the true desires and aspiration of the Syrian people. This same shallow diplomacy was used previously by western political leaders to delegitimise other nation-states – like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and now again in Syria. All of these nation-building projects have left nothing but death and destruction (and western corporate ‘rebuilding’ profits) in their wake. In the case of Libya and Iraq, the collapsing of these two societies by the US, Britain and France primarily – has given the world the very terrorists menaces currently infesting Syria, Iraq, Libya and Yemen today, including ISIS and al Nusra Front (al Qaeda in Syria).
By extension, one can now argue that current refugee or migrant’ crisis in Europe is a directbyproduct of western policies that led to the collapse of Libya and also the destabilisation of Syria, as well as the Iraq and Afghan wars too.
If the UK’s primary intention is truly to degrade and destroy ISIS and al Qaeda in Syria, then it would have already requested authorization from the Syrian government to participate in a coordinated military campaign with the only Arab force that has ‘boots on the ground’ in Syria – the Damascus government’s own Syrian Arab Army (SAA). To do so would have definitely helped to speed up the task, but neither the US, UK, France, Turkey ever bothered with the prudent route and the reason must be this: the ‘Coalition’ has been quietly banking on the hope that their ‘rebel alliance’ of ISIS and al Qaeda affiliated terrorists would do the job of ousting the government in Damascus in the same way that NATO used Islamic Fighting groups on the ground in Libya in 2010-2011 to oust the government in Libya and collapse the entire country and its society, and in doing so creating a permanent vacuum for lawlessness and terrorism.
Anarchy and chaos followed Britain’s decision to bomb Libya. To this day, not one political leader who led the charge to destroy Libya has the character to stepped forward to take responsibility for the collapse of Libya. When the dust eventually settles in Syria (one day), we can only expect the same behaviour again – namely, silence and evasion of any substantial inquiry.
If Western leaders and their allied GCC and Arab nations are not willing to coordinate with the only Arab force, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), who is actually fighting ISIS and al Qaeda on the ground in Syria, then why not coordinate through Russia as a partner? The answer is clear: despite all the western hot air and rhetoric about “defeating ISIS/ISIL”, the west chooses to play a cynical geopolitical game instead. Instead, the number one priority of the ‘Coalition’ was, is and always will be regime change in Syria. Western politicians have been lying and obstructing the truth from their public all along with Syria, since 2011, and even before that – with US plans to overthrown the Syrian government could be visibly traced to in 2006 (as evidenced by Wikileaks cables found here).
If UNSCR 2249 is to be truly observed, then the Western powers should focus first on the cutting off the life-blood of ISIS and al Qaeda in Syria – by squeezing terror financing, locking down key arms, oil and human smuggling along Turkish-Syrian borders, and by sharing intelligence with all willing parties, including Russia. However, if they did this, then they would have to face the ugly truth of fellow Coalition members and their respective roles in keeping ISIS in business. This includes US-UK allies Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and Jordan – each of whom has played a pivotal role in fueling instability and terrorism inside Syria and Northern Iraq. If justice was truly being served here, then the UK Parliament would deal first with this issue long before any War Vote should ever come to the floor.
A more robust international legal argument can be found here.
Make no mistake, this is one of the most important decisions government will make in the young 21st century. Prime Minister David Cameron’s renewed push for a ‘war vote’ this week smacks of political opportunism by a politician who is seeking to capitalize on a residual emotive public sentiment in the wake of the recent Paris Attacks. If today’s western leaders truly understood history, then they would know that when the harsh lessons of Nuremberg go unheeded, and undeclared wars of aggression are allowed to be waged, these ultimately lead to a state of international lawlessness and anarchy, which has and will so often lead to World War.
It seems as if David Cameron and the sponsors of this latest attempt to upend International Law are not willing to pause and give any serious consideration to this important historical lesson, but rather, they are bent on repeating the destructive political decisions of past governments by waging illegal military interventions in the name of the British people.
The hard truth here is that any UK bombing campaign in Syria would have little if any impact in defeating ISIS, and will do nothing to help reach a political solution down the road in Syria, nor will not make the British people any safer at home. To argue that somehow it would – is a ludicrous idea. Nor will a UK bombing campaign empower “moderate” FSA rebels. The reality is that the only ground forces who will benefit from a UK bombing campaign are jihadist and radical Salafist insurgents. Does David Cameron want to assist jihadist and radical Salafist insurgents?
So if the ‘international community’ really wants to see ‘peace and stability’ return to the nation-state of Syria, then it should stop breaking international law in Syria.
Enough with the exaggerations, the propaganda, the lies and the deception. End the fraud. Stop this dirty war in Syria.
All MPs should carefully consider their choice on this issue. Don’t be on the wrong side of history this Wednesday.
Concerned About Our Future (are you?)