British Prime Minister David Cameron leaves 10 Downing St. in London on Friday, ahead of a vote on whether the U.K. should join airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq.
LONDON—British Prime Minister David Cameron on Friday secured parliamentary support for the U.K. to join U.S.-led airstrikes against the militant group Islamic State, the final political hurdle that needed to be cleared before launching military action.
In a special parliamentary session Friday, 524 lawmakers voted in favor of participating in airstrikes in Iraq against Islamic State, and 43 voted against.
The key question that remains, however, is whether the U.K. will also expand the mission to Syria. Mr. Cameron has said he believes there are legal grounds to do so but said he limited Friday's discussion to Iraq because there wasn't sufficient support for military action in Syria as well.
For many lawmakers, the situation in Syria appears less clear cut and there are concerns about the legal basis as intervention isn't at the request of the government—as they are in Iraq.
Mr. Cameron, speaking in Parliament Friday, indicated that U.K. involvement could ultimately spread to Syria, though he acknowledged it was a more complicated situation than Iraq.
"I do believe there's a strong case for us to do more in Syria, but I did not want to bring a motion to the house today which there wasn't consensus for," Mr. Cameron said,
He added, however, that if there was a need to take urgent action to protect British interests, he would order that and afterward consult Parliament.
In making his case for airstrikes in Iraq, Mr. Cameron said Islamic State is a brutal terrorist organization that poses a threat not only to the Middle East but to the streets of Britain. He added that the U.K. has a duty to take part and that it can't "subcontract" protecting the British streets to others.
Islamic State, also known as ISIL or ISIS, "is a terrorist organization unlike those we have dealt with before," Mr. Cameron told his parliamentary colleagues. "Their brutality is staggering: beheadings, crucifixions, the gouging out of eyes, the use of rape as a weapon, the slaughter of children—all these things belong to the Dark Ages."
"Is there a threat to the British people? The answer is 'yes,'" said Mr. Cameron. Islamic State has already killed one British hostage; is threatening to kill two more; has inspired terrorist acts in Europe, such as the attack on the Jewish museum in Brussels; and security services have disrupted six other known plots in Europe and a terrorist attack in Australia, he said
"This is not a threat on the far side of the world," Mr. Cameron said.
The U.K.'s decision to join in air strikes brings with it various risks. Friends of Alan Henning, a British aid-convoy volunteer being held by Islamic State, have publicly expressed concern that air strikes would diminish Mr. Henning's chance of being released.
The prime minister had sought to garner consensus ahead of Friday's debate after suffering an embarrassing defeat last year when he unexpectedly lost a parliamentary vote on possible military action in Syria following claims the regime of President Bashar al-Assad had carried out chemical weapons attacks.
President Barack Obama has implored allies to join his international coalition against Islamic extremism. Denmark's government said Friday it plans to join the campaign by sending seven fighter jets to northern Iraq, a decision expected to be approved by its parliament next week.
Major European allies—including France, the U.K. and Germany—have so far all declined to send their aircraft into Syrian airspace.
Among other concerns British lawmakers have raised is what is the end point for British involvement.
Mr. Cameron said the goal of U.K. intervention would be to "see ISIL degraded and then destroyed as a serious terrorist force."
But, the prime minister, warned, this wouldn't happen quickly. "This is going to be a mission that will take not just months, but years," he said. "The hallmarks of this campaign will be patience and persistence, not shock and awe."
During his speech, Mr. Cameron also sought to allay fears that British troops would get drawn into battle on the ground by stating in the motion being debated Friday that U.K. ground troops won't be deployed in Iraq.
Mr. Cameron argued that the airstrikes would be legal because they would be at the request of the Iraqi government and that it was with the backing of other partners in the Middle East.
Labour leader Ed Miliband voiced his support for Iraq strikes, saying the motion met the criteria of being legal and just. But, he added that he understood "the qualms and for some deep unease that there will be about this undertaking both in this House and in the country."
Martin Tinworth, a spokesman for the U.K.'s ministry of defense, said U.K. combat jets are ready and prepared to go within hours once they receive direction from the U.K. government. He said timing of the operation would depend on strategy, and noted that the situation on the ground in Iraq is quickly changing.
France carried out air strikes in Iraq on Sept. 19, a day after President François Hollande formally announced that France would strike.
The U.K. has been slower to back its chief ally, the U.S., than in the past, with the government insisting that military action should be part of a wider international coalition including regional powers, and at the invitation of the country. Mr. Cameron has also said there should be an inclusive government in Iraq capable of uniting the country.
The wall street journal
No comments:
Post a Comment