After being brainwashed by the media, will the British people be invited – this autumn – to go to war again in the Middle East?

A message from Rye alerts readers to a momentous debate in parliament which will be held this autumn, according to comments trailed by David Cameron, the prime minister and Michael Fallon, secretary of state for defence. (Early in July, the Defence Secretary Michael Fallon was quoted as saying that ministers were considering ordering bombing raids against ISIS strongholds in Syria as early as September). It continues:

We have been quietly involved in bombing targets in Iraq for months, with all the ‘collateral damage’ that entails for innocent civilians.

The military hawks now wish to extend operations into Syria. This will take the battle into ISIL’s stronghold, they say, and retaliate for the outrages on the beaches of Tunisia and elsewhere.

After last year’s surprise parliamentary defeat, we are again being prepared for this adventure in quasiconsultation mode, with the media carrying horrific images of terrorist acts in Europe, Africa and the Middle East. Images are repeatedly presented to the British public that appeal to our sense of indignation and/or sentimental affront.

Claims are increasingly strident, along the lines of: ‘Only military action can halt the spread of Islamic fundamentalism, before it gets too strong’ and ‘we owe a duty to help protect the populations of Iraq and Syria from the atrocities of war’ or ‘we must deny them the resources of oil and weapons’.

The humanitarian argument is an appeal to conscience, but it flies in the face of history – our history. Past interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq have not succeeded in stabilising those areas, any more than the United States military failure in Korea in the last century.

Such interventions are unlawful under the Charter of the United Nations (Articles 2.4 and 41).

Without the sanction of the UN Security Council or a specific UN Resolution the initiation of armed aggression is illegal. The United Nations Act 1946, which enables the government to authorize UK military forces to operate overseas, does so only under the authority of Article 41 and it specifically mentions the phrase ‘not involving the use of armed force’.

It is arguable, and should indeed be argued, that any use of armed force by HM Forces overseas is not only a breach of the UN Charter but also breaches the United Nations Act 1946. It is, therefore, illegal. We want no more fudges like those that took us into the Iraq war.

There is a powerful stirring of national and cultural identity that rejects the imperialism of the western powers and demands new state boundaries, and new governments for the Arab and African peoples. These demands are couched in the name of resurgent Islam, similar to the religious justification practised throughout our own history in the west, from the time of the crusades onwards.

It is no truism that war is evil. The results of war are unconfined. They extend through generations, breed resentments and burden ordinary people with terrible loss and suffering. There is a clear connection between homegrown jihadism in Europe and our government’s participation in armed aggression against Islamic states in Libya, the Middle East and Afghanistan.

Who can wonder that the Islamists seek to bring retribution to our heartland?

Who can doubt that the international arms trade is largely responsible for the dislocation and migration of vast numbers of people dispossessed of their homes and fleeing to Europe?

We, ourselves, are building this flood of refugees. How do we hold our elected representatives to account and get them to recognise the folly of war?

‘Not in our name’ is our mandate for peace. Let’s have the debate now, before ‘consultation’ becomes ‘fait accompli’.

Source: the Friend, 7 August 2015

Advertisements

Posted on August 8, 2015, in Democracy undermined, Environment, Foreign policy, Government, Health, Media, Military matters, MPs, Planning, Vested interests, warfare and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 1 Comment.

  1. It’s against international law, but they do it anyway. So much for democracy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: