UK bombing Syria will just mean more resentment leading to more terrorism. It can be no solution.
Lindsey German
Michael Fallon’s speech about bombing Syria is part of a process designed to soften public opinion for an autumn vote on such a campaign.
Two years ago the British parliament voted against the bombing of Syria – at that time against the Assad government – and Fallon hopes that he can reverse the process this time, even though the bombing will now be aimed at Assad’s opponents.
In addition it will require de facto agreement with Assad.The US is already bombing Syria as well as Iraq, with little success. Many argue that this bombing has helped ISIS recruit.
The proposal is in response to the terrible attack in Tunisia last week, but will do nothing to stop further attacks. Support for ISIS in Tunisia has grown in the past two years, largely as a result of the growth of terrorism in neighbouring Libya.
That in turn dates from the British and French led bombing of Libya in 2011 which has created a state of civil war, terrorism and misery for its people.
The war on terror, supported by Fallon and Cameron when it was launched in 2001, has failed in its aim of stopping terrorism. Exactly the opposite: terrorism has spread across the Middle East and Africa.
Fallon’s proposal means more of the same: more bombing, more misery for ordinary people of the Middle East, more resentment leading to more terrorism. It can be no solution.
Source: Stop the War Coalition
