The British government is finding its ground in the Parliament to pave the way for a vote that will send the country’s troops to Syria and Iraq in the war against terror. This time, the war is against the Islamic State, ISIS, that is becoming a great threat to peace and stability in the West, especially in Europe, while predominantly operating from Syria and Iraq.
In the recent wave of terror, the self-proclaimed caliphate has struck Beirut, Ankara, and Paris, killing hundreds of innocent civilians in the name of a self-proclaimed jihad.
British Prime Minister David Cameron has seen fit to make the decision of adding British troops in the Allied forces that are fighting in the war against ISIS (or ISIL) in Syria and Iraq. To date, France and Russia, two of the recent victims of the ISIS-planned terrorist attacks, bombarded ISIS-captured regions, especially Raqqa. Raqqa is the de facto capital of the Islamic State.
The PM, however, does not want to make a decision in haste. He has asked for a debate and vote on the issue in the House of Commons. The debate, as he expects, will be a marathon, as he has decided for the Parliament to come up with the decision on the crucial matter in one day. Therefore, the Members of the Parliament (MPs) are expected to see late-night action in the House of Commons.
“Tomorrow, I will be recommending to the Cabinet that there be a debate and vote in the House of Commons on Wednesday on a motion to participate in coalition airstrikes against ISIL in Syria,” PM Cameron said in a statement.
“ISIL poses a very direct threat to the United Kingdom—and as we have already seen in Iraq, British airstrikes can play a key role in degrading them; but they are only part of a comprehensive strategy for Syria. This strategy must include the international community working together to find a political solution to the turmoil in Syria; a continuation of our extensive humanitarian efforts; and a clear commitment to post-conflict reconstruction of Syria.”
This decision has seen a huge opposition regarding the haste with which it is being taken and the intelligence that the PM claims has convinced him on the said matter.
Last week, Cameron told the public that he has reliable intelligence that around 70,000 troops are deployed in Syria and Iraq to snub the terrorist organization. The opposition has rebuked the statement, saying that 70,000 is an exaggeration. Without a support group of more than 50,000 troops in the war zone, a campaign against ISIS can be suicidal.
“The 70,000 figure was provided to me by my experts and that’s why I made that point in the House of Commons,” Cameron had said.
Cameron retracted later, saying that the 70,000 includes allied forces, Kurd Peshmerga, and the Iraq Army. This may be enough support force for the British forces to continue war against terrorist ISIS. He also quoted the Special Forces and air strike assistance of the British Army in the war being instrumental for the allied forces.
The opposition parties have been questioning the nature of the decision, whether the future of this allied war on terror in Syria and Iraq has any political significance, or another allied assault on Iraq, the root cause of ISIS in the first place.
“The action we are taking is part of a broader strategy—a political strategy, a diplomatic strategy, a humanitarian strategy—and in the end, the answer to what is happening in Iraq and in Syria is the same,” PM said in response. “We need good strong governments that represent all of their peoples—Sunni, Shia, Kurd, Christian and Druze. That is right for Iraq, that is right for Syria. It will take time, this whole strategy will take time but it’s the right thing to do to make sure we go after the terrorists who threaten people in our country just as they attacked and killed those people on the streets of Paris, on the streets on Ankara, on the streets of Beirut and indeed British people on the beaches of Tunisia.”