Shame we simply can’t bomb Assad
THERE was an academic on BBC radio years ago who, when asked a question, used to reply: ‘“Let us define our terms.” It sounded pretty pompous but actually it had merit. He was simply saying: explain what you mean. One might say the same to the question of today. Are we going to war over Syria? Precisely what do we mean by war? Twice we have gone to war recently – or recently enough to remember pretty clearly.
In 2003 we joined the US in invading Iraq. Before we went into Basra at the southern tip of the land savagely ruled by Saddam Hussein there was a parliamentary debate. Our chosen representatives said “Yes” but we later learned it had been lied to. How valid is that?
The reason we co-invaded was not the endlessly described cruelty of Saddam but the allegation he had weapons of mass destruction and might use them at any time. That was a lie; he had nothing.
More to the point, Iraq was not impregnated with Russian bases, troops, navy and air force or anyone else’s. The chance of sparking a world war was pretty remote. No one was likely to come to his aid, nor see their own troops being gunned down by ours.
BUT IF we were to invade Syria to topple another sadistic animal in the presidential palace it would be virtually impossible for AngloAmerican troops or pilots not to clash with Russians or for the two superpowers not to end up fighting each other – ie, a world war, possibly escalating to nuclear.
Under David Cameron we intervened in Libya – but only from the air. This was to topple another monstrous tyrant, Muammar Gaddafi. He also had no WMD and no allies to rescue him. As with Syria today he did have an insurrection from his own people going on, so we were able to claim we were just helping one side – the good guys – in a civil war, ie, righteous intervention but not invasion.
It turned out disastrously – as did Iraq for different reasons. The shattered and humiliated Iraqi Sunnis gave rise to ISIL (still with us) and Libya gave rise to chaos and mass immigration from that coast into Europe – still going on. We lost 179 fine young people in Iraq and none in Libya where (apart from some Special Forces on covert ops) we never landed. And all for what?
It seems to me that in Syria we have delayed too long (six years of faffing about) and the cause of the Syrian Rebel Army (the Free Syria cause, excluding extremists) is lost. We could have destroyed Assad before the Russians arrived but we refused to do so. As every general will tell you: you cannot win wars from the air alone. There have to be feet on the ground to fight, win, occupy and hold liberated ground.
Most of the feet in Syria now belong to the dictator and his Russian friends. We have waited too long to help the Syrians. Their country is rubble, they suffer under two dictators (in Damascus and Moscow) and on our TV screens we see them suffer, day after day.
There is one thing that might work. The dropping of a rather large bomb on Assad’s palace when he is in residence would effect regime change in about two seconds. But here’s a novelty. Politicians discuss the death of men, women and children as if they were broiler hens but “slotting” the dictator himself is off the menu. Why? Because then politicians would have to live like the refugees they create by the hundred thousand. That would never do so the tyrant’s palace remains immune. Have a lovely weekend.