Author Archives: markdowe1

Britain, Government, Middle East, Politics, Society, Syria

A moment of danger as well as opportunity

SYRIA

ON paper, the fall of a brutal tyrant, especially one who tortured and gassed his own people, should be a cause for unqualified celebration in the free world.

In practice, we know from bitter experience that when such despots are deposed, fresh chaos and tyranny all too often follow in the immediate aftermath. Elation over the horror of Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gaddafi quickly turned to intense fear as Iraq and Libya were consumed by anarchy and civil war.

So, following the abrupt fall of Bashar al-Assad, the world is asking with some trepidation: What comes next for Syria, the wider Middle East, and the West?

Not for the first time in this volatile and unpredictable region, Western intelligence agencies were blindsided by the speed and intensity of the Islamist rebel offensive.

After capturing Damascus, and forcing Assad into exile, the insurgents declared total victory. Most prominent among the militias is Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS).

Its leaders may be preaching moderation right now, but they have their roots in ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Extremism and vengeance lurk behind the façade.

The various rebel factions have little in common except their hatred of Assad. Will they manage to unite to form a government – or plunge into a bloody power struggle?

The collapse of the regime is unquestionably a humiliation and a major strategic blow for Iran and Russia, its staunchest allies. Iran, because it uses Syria in funnelling weapons to its proxy Hezbollah in Lebanon; Russia, because it has military bases in Syria that it will wish to protect.

The British PM welcomed the toppling of Assad’s “barbaric regime” and called for peace and stability, but with radical Islamists now in charge he risks looking naïve. Events in Syria represent a profound challenge to the West.

Undoubtedly, the renewed violence and instability in Syria will almost certainly trigger fresh waves of refugees heading for Europe and the UK. Strong political leadership and coordination in the West is now an imperative.

One of the many unanswered questions is what will happen now to the 50,000 former ISIS militants currently held by Kurdish forces in north-east Syria.

If these brutal jihadis are released or fight their way out of the camps, the repercussions could be deadly in Europe as well as the Middle East.

And the warning given by ex-MI6 chief Sir Alex Younger of a “serious spike” in the threat posed this country by foreign and home-grown extremists that could be inspired by a resurgence of Islamic State is deeply alarming. We know from atrocities committed here in the past just how murderous and hard to predict these fanatics can be.

The current UK terror threat is at level 3 – “substantial” – but may well be elevated in the light of unfolding events. Extra-vigilance will now be needed by our security services, police, and the Border Force.

The world also awaits to see what kind of regime the rebels will create in Assad’s place. Whatever Hayat Tahrir al-Sham is saying publicly, the West must remember that it as an offshoot of al-Qaeda, and so its leaders are unlikely to be fans of Western democracy.

The UK has announced £11 million in foreign aid for Syria. We must be very careful where that money goes. As Foreign Secretary David Lammy rightly reminded the House of Commons, HTS remains a proscribed terrorist organisation.

Jubilation over the fall of a dictator should not blind us to the risks of what comes next. As Mr Lammy said: “This is a moment of danger as well as opportunity.”

Standard
Arts, Books, History

History Books of the Year

LITERARY REVIEWS

The Siege by Ben Macintyre (published by Viking, 400pp)

FOR six long days in the spring of 1980, the world held its breath after armed dissidents opposed to the Ayatollah Khomeini seized the Iranian embassy in London, holding 26 people hostage, among them a British policeman on duty at the door and two members of the BBC who were there to get visas.

It was a turning point, an event that broke entirely new ground. Not only was it the first time that Middle East terrorism reared its head in the West – an unwelcome chapter that is still far from finished – it was also the premier performance of Britian’s elite military soldiers, who took the embassy, gun-toting figures in black balaclavas storming it on live, prime-time television.

Most of the public had never heard of these Special Forces or Regiment before; afterwards, they were – and still are – a legend.

Ben Macintyre tells the inside story with his customary pace and panache, the tension mounting as the minutes ticked away and the terrorists threatened to murder their hostages, but also not shying away from the moral nuances of the finale in which all but one of the perpetrators died.

Macintyre’s account draws on contemporary diaries and interviews with witnesses. The Ministry of Defence cleared former special forces soldiers to speak to him. He writes: “Most of the source material is secret, pseudonymous, or privately owned.” With some justification, this has been described as “the last word on the subject”.

Queen Victoria and her Prime Ministers by Anne Somerset (Published by William Collins, 576pp)

A MONARCH reigns but does not rule – that is the unique and eccentric nature of the British constitution.

And the restrictions placed on her ability to get her own way frequently enraged Queen Victoria.

In public, her prime ministers queued up to praise her “thorough understanding” (Gladstone’s phrase) of her constitutional position, but they, of all people, knew first hand how indignant she became on being reminded of who really ran the country.

Theoretically, she had immense power – to disband the army, declare war, pardon all convicted offenders, and to dismiss the civil service. Wisely, she chose not to risk a revolution by exercising these rights, but that didn’t mean she was politically inactive. Behind the scenes, she made her presence, her views and, above all, her displeasure known to the various men – ten in all over 64 years – who headed her governments.

Her meddling led to Gladstone to whisper behind her back that she was “an imperious despot”.

The feeling was mutual. She couldn’t stand him and complained he was humourless, and unable to take a joke.

But according to Anne Somerset, Queen Victoria made an important impact through her “uncanny ability to align herself with public opinion, instinctively espousing views that coincided with those of many of her subjects”, even though her day-to-day life in palaces and country houses was far removed from theirs.

The common sense of the stout little widow in a black bonnet – drawing on what she called her “desire to do what is fit and right” – was crucial in steering the nation away from the sort of popular unrest and extremism that after her death would overtake other European countries.

Takeover: Hitler’s Rise to Power by Timothy W. Ryback (Published by Headline, 416pp)

At the back end of 1932, it was common currency among the politically aware in the Weimar Republic that the man they sneered at as the “Bavarian corporal” was a busted flush, along with his Nazi Party and its uniformed stormtroopers.

They’d failed to get anywhere near a majority in recent elections to the Reichstag, with two-thirds of German voters rejecting them and their share of the popular vote falling.

A cartoon on the front page of a national newspaper had Adolf Hitler slouching against a table holding a broken swastika in his hand like a child moping over a broken toy.

And just weeks later, at the end of January 1933, that same Adolf Hitler was all-powerful, reluctantly appointed Chancellor of Germany by the ageing President von Hindenburg.

Twice in the past, Hindenburg had sent Hitler away empty-handed, refusing to elevate the would-be dictator. This time, caught in a constitutional deadlock of rival parties, none of whom had majority backing, he gave in submissively. 

How Hitler combined foot-stamping intransigence with adept political manoeuvring (i.e. lies and broken promises) to reach his objective is forensically examined by US historian Timothy Ryback. What comes across is how close the Führer came to failing and possibly sparing the world all the horrors that followed.

Instead, the complacency of his multiple enemies, pursuing their own interests instead of combining to keep him out, gave Hitler his opportunity.

Standard
Britain, Government, ICC, Israel, Legal, Politics, Society

War crimes demand accountability

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

THE arrest warrants from the International Criminal Court (ICC) for the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his defence minister Yoav Gallant, represent a historic milestone in the fight for accountability over war crimes.

For Israel’s leadership, the ICC’s action ends decades of perceived impunity and challenges what critics describe as Israel’s longstanding “shield of immunity”. There were predictable reactions: Netanyahu condemned the ICC’s decision as “antisemitic”, while others praised the warrants against Israel’s leaders as an “important historical precedent”. The ICC’s jurisdiction over Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem provides the legal foundation for this bold move. However, the real test of these warrants lies with the ICC’s 124 member states, which are legally obliged to arrest the accused and transfer them to The Hague. Failure to act would expose international law as a façade, undermining its ability and allowing powerful nations and their allies to trample justice with impunity. Enforcing these warrants is not just a legal obligation – it is a moral imperative to uphold the principle that no leader is above the law.

This mandate demands both individual accountability and state responsibility, prohibiting governments from aiding or enabling war crimes. The UK government faces criticism for its support of Israel, which campaigners argue has long contravened international law. Many European nations that championed ICC action against Russia’s Vladimir Putin must now confront their obligations toward Israel. Failing to enforce the warrants risks betraying commitments and eroding trust in multilateral justice. The consistency of their responses will test their commitment to international law.

Like Israel, the United States does not recognise the ICC’s authority. Washington’s longstanding rejection of ICC jurisdiction, coupled with threats of sanctions against cooperating states sends a troubling message: that international law applies only to weaker nations, not to global powers or their allies. Such resistance weakens the global justice system and calls into question the principles the US claims to uphold. The crimes at the centre of those warrants are among the gravest violations of international humanitarian law, including starvation as a weapon of war and deliberate attacks on civilians. When such acts are systematic and state-driven, they demand accountability. The ICC’s pursuit of justice tests the international community’s resolve to uphold these norms in the face of political resistance.

This moment represents more than a legal proceeding; it is a fundamental challenge to the international order. The ICC’s actions signal that even the most powerful nations must answer for breaches of humanitarian law. If member states fail to act, they risk rendering international law meaningless. The choice is clear: uphold the principles of justice and law or accept a world where power determines impunity. By endorsing the court’s decision, rogue states will begin to fear being brought to book. Upholding these principles is essential to a just international order where the law protects all, not just the strong. A powerful message is contained in the ICC warrants: that the era of unchecked impunity for war crimes must end.

A special responsibility falls to Britain, which helped to create the ICC when Labour’s Robin Cook was foreign secretary. It was an important and valuable achievement that should not now be undermined. Keir Starmer must make it absolutely, unambiguously clear that if Netanyahu or Gallant steps foot on UK territory, they will be arrested and handed over to the court to face trial. It’s not politics, and neither is it personal. It’s justice.

Standard