Ten questions with Rod Lurie, director of Operation Enduring Freedom film “The Outpost”


Theresa May will hold a crucial Cabinet meeting on April 12, 2018, where she and her ministers will decide to join military action in Syria.

The Prime Minister will seek approval from her cabinet to join Donald Trump’s United States in launching airstrikes against the Syrian regime led by Bashar al-Assad, the disgraced president of the war-torn country.

May wants to launch airstrikes without first getting parliamentary approval, the BBC reports, in a move reportedly opposed by Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn and many other opposition MPs in the House of Commons.

This means Britain is set to join the United States in yet another military foray into the Middle East. This is how we got there.

‘Hateful’ chemical attack shocks the world

The West is preparing to respond to a chemical attack that left at least 40 dead and hundreds more under treatment in the Syrian city of Douma on April 7, 2018. Douma is located a few kilometers from the country’s capital, Damascus , and is controlled by rebels who want to overthrow President Assad.

The attack was the latest chapter in a civil war that has ravaged Syria since 2011. The conflict has left more than 500,000 dead and an estimated 6.1 million displaced, according to data from the UN and the Syrian Observatory. human rights.

Prime Minister May, President Trump, and other Western leaders believe Assad is almost certainly behind the attack. May described the attack as a “barbaric and shocking act” which cannot remain “unchallenged” by Britain and its allies. The Assad regime denies being responsible for the attack.

Bashar al-Assad

British submarines would be moved within “missile range” of Syria and military action is expected to begin on April 12, 2018, if May obtains the support of his government ministers.

Does May not need the permission of the MPs?

Contrary to popular belief, the British Prime Minister is not legally obliged to seek parliamentary approval before launching military action. In fact, they don’t even need to inform them.

The root of this misconception is the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Then Prime Minister Tony Blair called on Parliament to vote in favor of invading Iraq. This created an informal convention which was followed by David Cameron, who a decade later decided not to act in Syria after MPs rejected it. Prime ministers may decide to seek parliamentary support to give political authority to their military action. After all, going to war is one of the riskiest and most controversial decisions a Prime Minister can make.

However, it is nothing more than a convention. In 2011, for example, MPs were only able to vote on the intervention in Libya after the intervention had started, which meant it was too late to reject it anyway.

Does the public want another war?

If May intends to ignore the conventions, it won’t be with the broad support of the British public. A YouGov poll released on April 12, 2018 found that only 22% of Britons support military action in Syria, while 43% oppose it.

Ten questions with Rod Lurie, director of Operation Enduring Freedom film

Labor leader Corbyn had previously told the BBC he supported a parliamentary vote before any action. He “should always have a say in any military action,” Corbyn said. “We don’t want bombings that lead to escalation and a scorching war between the United States and Russia in the skies over Syria. “

Speaking today, Corbyn asked how the airstrikes would improve the situation in Syria. “No more bombings, no more killings, no more wars will not save lives,” he told reporters.

Sir Vince Cable, leader of the Liberal Democrats, said he supported military action against Assad, but said it would require the support of MPs with “strong conditions around it”.

SNP defense spokesman Stewart McDonald warned that the airstrikes “will not provide the long-term solutions needed to end the war.”

What would be the ramifications?

The Syrian conflict is one of the greatest challenges facing the world, not least because it is so devilishly complex.

President Assad can be opposed by Britain, the United States, France and other Western countries, but he is supported by Iran and Russia under Vladimir Putin. This means that Syria has effectively become a proxy battleground for the tensions between the West and Russia, which are at their worst since the height of the Cold War.

A war of words is already underway. On April 11, 2018, President Trump told Putin to “prepare” for US missiles.

Ten questions with Rod Lurie, director of Operation Enduring Freedom film
Donald trump

“Russia pledges to shoot down all missiles fired at Syria. Prepare yourselves Russia, because they will come, nice and new and “smart!” Trump tweeted on April 11, 2018. “You shouldn’t partner with a gas killer animal that kills and takes advantage of its people!”

Russia had warned the United States that any missile fired at Syria would be shot down and its launch sites targeted.

Worrying for Britain, one of the launch sites identified by Russia could be a British military base in Cyprus, reports the Times. Eight Tornado fighter-bombers armed with cruise missiles located at RAF Akrotiri, on the south coast of Cyprus. These bombers are expected to contribute to airstrikes and could be exposed to Russian retaliation.

Russia has already moved warships to a base on the Mediterranean coast, within range of a US warship, according to satellite images of the region.

What is clear is that the risk of war between nuclear-weapon states is now at its highest level in a generation. The decisions May’s government make in the next few days could be among the most important made by a British government.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.