David Cameron is facing demands to set out the legal justification for military action against Syria amid mounting unease over the scale and speed of Britain’s commitment to another conflict in the Middle East.
William Hague warned on Monday that force may be the only viable option in response to what the Government believes was a chemical attack by the Syrian regime which killed hundreds of people in Damascus last week.
Britain, America and France are united in their readiness to act and do not
require any further United Nations resolution under international law, the
Foreign Secretary said. John Kerry, the US secretary of state, described the
chemical attack as a “moral obscenity” and warned that Bashar al-Assad, Syria’s
president, must face “consequences”.
Mr Hague’s comments led to calls for ministers to “make their case” and
detail the legal basis and long-term objectives of entering Syria’s bloody civil
war.
As it emerged that the West could launch cruise missiles within days, a poll
found wide public opposition to British involvement in “any kind” of military
action in Syria. In a survey of 2,000 people by YouGov, only nine per cent
supported sending British troops to fight in Syria, with 74 per cent against.
Three-quarters backed sending humanitarian aid.
The Russian government warned that a strike without UN backing would be a
“blatant violation of international law” that would worsen the situation on the
ground.
Post a Comment