May stands behind Trump on strikes against Syrian regime
Leaders resolve that Assad chemical attacks must end Prime Minister unlikely to go to Commons for vote
THERESA MAY last night gave her strongest signal yet that Britain would support Donald Trump in military action against the Syrian regime as the two leaders resolved “not to allow the use of chemical weapons to continue”.
The Prime Minister spoke to both Mr Trump and Emmanuel Macron, the French president, by telephone and all three agreed that Bashar al-assad, the Syrian president, had shown “total disregard” for international laws against the use of such weapons.
A Trump official raised the diplomatic tension by describing the chemical attack on Douma, Eastern Ghouta, as “genocide” and saying a military response was “appropriate”.
Mr Macron said the three countries would decide “within days” how to respond and discussed the possibility of hitting Syria’s “chemical capacities”.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, said: “All options are on the table.”
It came as Russia – which backs Assad – used its veto power at the UN Security Council yesterday against a US resolution to create a new expert body to determine responsibility for chemical weapons attacks in Syria, a move expected to increase the likelihood of US military intervention.
Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, last night criticised Russia’s veto. He described it as “hugely disappointing” and accused Russia of “holding the Syrian people to political ransom”.
Whitehall sources suggested Mrs May would prefer to have the backing of Parliament in any decision to join a military response against Syria, but with both Mr Trump and Mr Macron eager to strike swiftly, that option is unlikely to be open to the Prime Minister.
The Daily Telegraph has learnt that no plans have been put in place to recall MPS before Monday, when they will return after the Easter recess, suggesting Mrs May has resigned herself to taking the decision in conjunction with her Cabinet, rather than seeking the support of the Commons. Downing Street issued a more cautious statement than the White House last night, in which No10 said that the chemical attack “if confirmed” would represent fresh evidence of Assad’s “appalling cruelty”.
The White House’s version of the conversation between Mrs May and Mr Trump contained no such caveat, saying simply that “both leaders condemned Syrian President Assad’s vicious disregard for human life”.
There is no legal requirement to seek Parliament’s permission to take part in air strikes. A precedent has in recent years been established for giving Parliament a vote on military interventions, but Mrs May is aware that David Cameron suffered an embarrassing defeat over military action in Syria in 2013. Mr Johnson is among those who believe there is no need for a vote, while Tom Tugendhat, Tory chairman of the foreign affairs committee, said there was a “clear case for action”.
Tony Blair, the former prime minister who set a precedent in 2003 for Parliament having a vote on military action abroad, said there was no need for a vote in the case of air strikes, rather than using ground forces.
But Julian Lewis, the Conservative chairman of the Commons defence select committee, said that while governments might have to act first and seek MPS’ approval later if the UK was under attack, a strike on another country was another matter, and Bob Seely, the Tory MP, said the “right to debate should rest with Parliament”.
More than 40 MPS from opposition parties signed a motion calling for a vote on military action while Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, called for a political solution in Syria rather than
‘Both leaders condemned Syrian President Assad’s disregard for human life’
“megaphone diplomacy across the floor of the UN Security Council” between the US and Russia.
Mrs May chaired a meeting of the National Security Council, which includes the heads of the UK intelligence agencies, the Armed Forces and senior ministers, but Downing Street refused to discuss what it had decided.
A team of inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is on its way to Douma and Mrs May said: “Obviously we are working urgently with our allies and partners to assess what has happened on the ground.
“If this is the responsibility of Assad’s regime in Syria then it’s yet another example of the brutality and brazen disregard for their people that they show.”
However, Mr Trump appeared to be in no mood to wait for the inspectors’ findings, having said on Monday that he would decide within 48 hours how to respond. Yesterday he cancelled a planned trip to Latin America in order to prepare the US response.
Mr Trump is under growing pressure from Republican senators to follow through his tough rhetoric over the Syrian chemical attack with a military response.
Lindsey Graham, the Republican senator for South Carolina, said Assad himself should be a target in any air strikes. He said that if Mr Trump failed to launch an attack it would be “the biggest mistake of his presidency”.
Kay Hutchison, the US permanent representative to Nato, said: “We would call on Russia to do something. They are propping up Assad. They should do something to stop this kind of genocide. I think a military response is appropriate.”
A No10 spokesman said of Mrs May’s calls with Mr Trump and Mr Macron: “They agreed that reports of a chemical weapons attack in Syria were utterly reprehensible and if confirmed, represented further evidence of the Assad regime’s appalling cruelty against its own people and total disregard for its legal obligations not to use these weapons.
“They agreed that the international community needed to respond to uphold the worldwide prohibition on the use of chemical weapons. They agreed they would continue working closely together and with international partners to ensure that those responsible were held to account.”