Hello!
I recently had some correspondence with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office about our involvement in Syria. My mail was this:
Dear Mr Johnson,
I am writing about the strong support you offered to the United States on their recent missile strike on Syria, following a chemical weapons incident. It seems very unlikely that the chemical weapons attack was initiated by Assad, who had neither the means, nor the motive for the attack. His enemies have both. Regardless, the missile strike was clearly a flagrant and egregious violation of international law, which forbids individual countries taking unilateral action in this way whether Syria used chemical weapons or not, and I wonder if you could answer the following questions for me.
1. Do you uphold International Law?
2. You put a proposal to the UN that the chemical attack be investigated. If you have proof it was Assad, why is an investigation necessary? If you do not have proof it was Assad, why did you support a missile strike?
3. The US admit to having blown up over 100 tons of high level radioactive waste (depleted uranium) over urban areas such as Fallujah, resulting in appalling cancers and deformities in uncounted civilians, clearly a far worse crime than the Syrian attack. Would should be done about this in your opinion?
And this was their reply:
Dear Mr Glover,
Thank you for your email of 17 April to the Foreign Secretary about Syria. The Near East Department of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has been asked to reply.
The situation in Syria is a humanitarian catastrophe caused by the Syrian regime and those who support it. The conflict has tragically cost over 400,000 lives. The use of chemical weapons is appalling. In the attack on Khan Sheikhoun on 4 April over 70 people were killed, many of them children. The Foreign Secretary made a statement in the House of Commons Syria on 18 April 2017 giving an update on the situation in Syria, informing the house what we know about the Khan Sheikhoun attack.
UK scientists at Defence Science and Technology Laboratory Porton Down have analysed environmental samples obtained from Khan Sheikhoun. These have tested positive for the nerve agent sarin. The results clearly identify chemical signatures specific to sarin manufactured by the Syrian regime and consistent with UN samples from the sarin attack in Ghouta on 21 August 2013. We are now almost certain that the Syrian regime carried out a chemical attack using the nerve agent sarin in Khan Sheikhoun on 4 April 2017.
The UK Government fully supported the US military action against Shayrat airbase from which we believe the Syrian regime launched chemical weapons attacks, which we believe was an appropriate response to the use of chemical weapons. We hope this action will deter further chemical weapons attacks. It’s for US to set out their legal basis for taking this action, in the same way that we determine our own legal basis for our actions. We strongly support the independent, impartial and expert investigation by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) into this atrocity. At the UN Security Council on 12 April we put forward with our close partners a Security Council Resolution to express condemnation of the use of chemical weapons and to give full support to this existing, established international investigation of the Khan Sheikhoun incident. This was an important resolution designed to underline the international community’s rejection of any use of chemical weapons and support the existing investigation. The Resolution had broad international support and received 10 votes in favour on the Security Council. We are dismayed that Russia has once again blocked the UN Security Council from taking action by using its veto. We will continue to support action to ensure accountability for those responsible for this crime.
We remain convinced that long-term peace in Syria requires transition away from the Asad regime, and a political settlement which allows Syria to become a stable, peaceful state with an inclusive government with which we can work to tackle Daesh and other extremists. We support fully the Syrian peace talks taking place under the auspices of UN Special Envoy Staffan de Mistura in Geneva. The Syrian Opposition High Negotiations Committee have demonstrated their commitment to the political process by adopting a positive approach, agreeing an inclusive delegation and setting out moderate and pragmatic proposals. The regime and its backers must now show the same commitment to achieving a negotiated solution that can bring a sustainable end to this dreadful conflict.
On the issue of Depleted Uranium (DU) ammunition, we are conscious that there is some concern about a possible link between the use of DU munitions and medical problems such as cancers and birth defects. Environmental monitoring in areas where DU munitions have been used has confirmed the presence of DU at levels far too low to have any detectable health impact. These observations are consistent with the findings of many agencies and with the recent World Health Organisation statement, that, “for the general population, neither civilian nor military use of DU is likely to produce radiation doses significantly above normal background levels”.
The UK will continue to do all that we can to ensure that a long-term, lasting solution is found to resolve the current crisis in Syria. And in the meantime, we will maintain all efforts to help those people affected by it.
It was a good reply, but I have a few comments.
Firstly, they made no attempt to address my main point which is that any military action in Syria is a war crime under international law. The implication is that they intend to continue to commit war crimes. Some of you may think it is odd that I defend Assad against attack, but the law is what it is for a reason. Consider this; when I was younger there was a violent uprising against the British government in part of the UK. The UK government acted with extra judicial force, and thousands died in the Northern Ireland “troubles”. What if China had decided that the UK government was oppressing free expression, and bombed London to rubble, murdering the Prime Minister with a dagger up the rear end, as happened to Gadaffi? You would argue that even if the UK government behaved badly, slaughtering millions of innocent bystanders was not an acceptable response. So it is in Syria.
Many people are unaware of the scale of the holocaust that has been unleashed by Western military intervention in the middle east. It is estimated that perhaps 4 million people have been killed; certainly tens of millions have had their lives utterly destroyed, as a direct result of our action; we are guilty of crimes comparable to the Nazi Holocaust. And who cares?
Secondly the Foreign office claim to have obtained samples of Sarin from the recent incident (How? No-one has been there, the area is occupied by ISIS, and Sarin is incredibly poisonous). They say it has the same “fingerprint” as Sarin used some years ago in Ghouta. But UN weapons inspectors established beyond doubt that the Ghouta incident was carried out by ISIS in an attempt to bring the US into the war. If this sarin has the same fingerprint it is presumably from the same source. The FCO claim to be certain that Assad was responsible in spite of the obvious implausibility, and the only evidence they provide suggests the opposite.
The FCO say they support an independent investigation and that this was blocked by Russia. What they don’t say is that Russia is very keen to have an investigation, and put their own resolution forward. The Russians objected to the British proposal only on the grounds that it was actually to be run by the British, who had by their own admission already decided guilt, and so are clearly not independent.
On the subject of depleted uranium, the FCO deliberately misquote the WHO report, which directly contradicts the claims of the FCO. In fact the WHO report says that military use of DU can present a serious hazard to civilians, and that areas affected should be cordoned off and cleared before civilians can enter the area.
Finally, Syria was a peaceful secular state until a few years ago. Many British tourists visited and testified that it was very friendly. I recently spoke to a student from Aleppo; she told me that although she opposed the Syrian government and protested for change (remember the battles between the police and the coal miners under Thatcher?), Aleppo was a happy place until it was attacked by outside forces including Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Isrel, the UK, the United States and a mercenary army of Jihadists from Libya to Chechnya. Now Syria, like Iraq lies in ruins, with hundreds of thousands (millions?) dead. But it seems very unlikely that those responsible will ever be held to account for their crimes.