Don’t rush in to the Syrian quagmire

he took this country into Iraq on the basis of a lie, triggered incalculable human suffering and without question bears huge responsibility for the blood-soaked chaos in the Middle east today.

So the minute the Mail hears that master of deceit Tony Blair insisting that Britain should intervene in Syria, our every instinct tells us his arguments are wrong.

Yet rejecting Mr Blair’s rush to action does not answer the question of how Theresa May, and the West, should respond to the sickening chemical weapons attack on Douma last week.

No-one could see the pictures of children foaming at the mouth after inhaling poison gas without recoiling in horror. Nor does the Mail have any doubt about who is responsible for the deaths. Time and again Bashar Al Assad has inflicted merciless and brutal assaults on his own people.

Yet in the shadow of Iraq, any decision to begin military action in this region must be taken with extreme caution. To those who argue that ‘something must be done’ the Mail asks ‘why?’ – unless the objectives (and potential benefits) are clear.

As of last night, no detailed plans had been made public. Will Britain simply take a role in refuelling US and French aircraft? Will missiles be fired on Syrian military targets? Or will RAF pilots be entering the conflict zone, putting them at risk? Thank God, there is no suggestion of British troops on the ground.

The brutal truth is that it’s too late in the day to make any difference in the sevenyear Syrian debacle in which evil has prevailed while the West has been reduced to backing the very jihadis who would destroy us. And with Russia standing squarely behind Assad, and yesterday warning of ‘grave repercussions’, the dangers of escalation are all too obvious.

Then there is the matter of Parliament’s role. Mr Blair would blithely have the Prime Minister authorise intervention without even raising it in the Commons. The Mail could not disagree more strongly. There is precedent for MPs being able to debate – and indeed vote – on military action, as they did over Syria in 2013 and again two years later.

So there is, rightly, an expectation that Mrs May would come to the Commons to explain what she proposes and exactly what it would achieve. Only then can a thoughtful, reasoned judgment be made about stepping into the quagmire of the Middle east once again. It is a move about which the Mail feels very queasy indeed.