Tag Archives: Bashar al-Assad

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
Britain, France, Military, Syria, United States

Debrief: Syrian strikes on Assad’s chemical storage units

SYRIA

BRITISH military commanders were so concerned about Russian retaliation during the missile strikes on Syria that two RAF fighter jets were kept back at high readiness to guard the airbase in Cyprus.

As RAF Tornado GR4s flew to help launch cruise missiles against the Assad regime, two Typhoon fighters stayed behind, poised on the runway at the base in Akrotiri.

. See RAF Tornados to be withdrawn in 2019

British commanders feared Moscow could (and it remains possible) launch an immediate act of revenge and so kept the Typhoon jets at high readiness to scramble and shoot down any incoming missiles.

The Pentagon included the two jets in a list of assets that took part in the assault under the cover of darkness last Saturday, even though they remained at the British base.

The military operation unfolded early, with British, US and French forces co-ordinating extremely precise strikes on Assad’s chemical stockpiles.

At about 2am UK time, RAF warplanes helped wipe out a chemical weapons storage plant in just 120 seconds without even entering Syrian airspace.

Four British Tornado jets fired a total of eight Storm Shadow cruise missiles, each worth £750,000 at the Him Shinshar chemical weapons storage facility, 15 miles west of Homs. It was struck by a further 14 missiles fired by the French and the US and razed to the ground.

The RAF Tornados were protected by a further two Typhoon fighter jets that flew in escort to an area north of Cyprus designated as a ‘firing box’.

A total of three suspected chemical weapons facilities were hit by 105 missiles fired from warplanes and jets from the three allies.

The other facilities have been confirmed as the Barzah research and development centre in greater Damascus, which was hit by 76 US missiles, and the chemical weapons bunker facility at Him Shinshar – four miles from the storage facility – which was hit by seven missiles fired from French Mirage fighter jets. Rafale fighters from France were also involved in the operation.

Tornado GR4

RAF Tornado GR4s from Akrotiri in Cyprus launched Storm Shadow missiles at targets in Syria that has set back Assad’s chemical weapons stockpiles and facilities by many years.

The mission was set in motion at 10:30pm last Friday in a telephone call between Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson and his counterparts in Paris and Washington. The Prime Minister was then informed that the mission would soon be under way.

At 1am four Tornado jets and two Typhoon jets took off from RAF Akrotiri. They returned to base safely and landed at about 2:15am. Russia did not use its missile defence system to fire back, despite claims from the Kremlin it had shot down weapons in response.

It can also be confirmed that Syria fired 40 surface-to-air missiles but none of them hit the incoming missiles and most of them were fired after the last Syrian target was already destroyed.

In a Cabinet meeting held last Thursday, the Defence Secretary talked through the procedure and the efforts made into minimising the risk of civilian casualties and protecting troops.

Theresa May travelled to Chequers on Friday, where at about 11pm she filmed a video message announcing she had approved the mission. The RAF was then duty bound to act.

Mrs May’s video message was broadcast at 2:10am on Saturday, just after she received a call confirming RAF jets were back on the ground and safe.

Images seen showed the tense final preparations at Akrotiri before the operation was launched. One showed a Flight Lieutenant carrying a pistol holder and inspecting a missile attached to the wing of the Tornados.

Each GR4 was flown by a two-man crew drawn from the RAF’s 31 Squadron, known as the Gold Stars. These airmen form part of 903 Expeditionary Air Wing based at Akrotiri. Crews have been conducting air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq and Syria since 2015. All eight British missiles found their targets.

Early indications suggest that President Assad’s chemical weapons stockpiles and facilities have been set back many years. The target choices have been described as being ‘very methodical’.

 

THE USE of an Astute-class submarine armed with Tomahawk missiles was ruled out in the hours leading up to the strike. Despite this, Russia was duped into launching a naval operation to find a British attack submarine that was excluded from the mission.

It was decided that the Storm Shadow cruise missiles on the RAF Tornado jets were the best assets available.

However, intelligence suggests that one kilo-class Russian hunterkiller left its position at Tartus in Syria to find the British submarine. Two Russian frigates and an anti-submarine aircraft were thought to have also been pointlessly searching for it.

The final plans drawn up for the strikes did not include a UK submarine. The Russians were simply outsmarted.

Standard
Britain, Finance, Syria, United Nations, United States

Military intervention in Syria following the Douma attack was proportionate

SYRIA

IT has now been fifteen years since the Iraq War. That conflict has cast a long shadow over British foreign policy. The blowback against former prime minister Tony Blair and those who supported his decision to commit British forces to that conflict was unprecedented. It has created in the current generation of political leaders an extreme caution when it comes to matters of military intervention.

No one doubts that the deployment of an armed response must always be the last resort. But when the caution of politicians means a rejection to step in when it is both appropriate and necessary, we are on very shaky moral ground.

The decision by the British Government along with our international allies France and the United States of direct strikes against Syrian chemical production sites is a clear point in case. The use by the Syrian government of chemical weapons in an attack that killed more than 40 people in the town of Douma could not go unchallenged. The West has responded with proportionate force that leaves both Syria and its proxy Russia in no doubt as to what will happen if the ‘red lines’ of chemical weapons are breached or proliferated.

Unfortunately, though, a difficult tone was set by President Trump as he took to Twitter in a typically hot-headed intervention last Wednesday when he promised deployment of ‘smart bombs’ prior to the strikes on Syrian targets. War should not be trivialised using social media, more so even by the president of the United States.

French president Emmanuel Macron, who has previously said the use of chemical weapons in Syria would also represent a “red line”, declared that he had proof the regime of Bashar al-Assad was behind the attack on Douma. Mr Macron remained cautious in the run up to the attacks but should be applauded for the courage he took in committing French warplanes to the cause.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has persistently asked for a full intelligence briefing on the situation in Syria. He also wanted any decision on military intervention to be put to a parliamentary vote.

Naturally, many who favour Britain’s involvement in strikes against the Assad regime will be deeply sceptical about Mr Corbyn’s intentions. He was, after all, once chairman of the Stop the War Coalition, which condemns military action by western governments.

This lack of trust is at the heart of politicians’ inability to move on from the Iraq War when discussing possible deployment of British troops. A common characteristic of those who felt strongly either way about the 2003 intervention is the belief that those with whom they disagree are acting in bad faith.

It is clearly time for our national debate to get past Iraq and for politicians to honestly assess the merits of action based on humanitarian need rather than political risk.

. See also Britain must now act against Syria’s regime

Standard