On April 14th,
shortly after the United Kingdom, United States and France bombed the sovereign
country of Syria, on the basis of unproven allegations of the use of chemical
weapons in Douma on 7thApril, the British Prime Minister, Theresa
May made the following comment in her official
statement:
“Together we have hit a
specific and limited set of targets. They were a chemical weapons
storage and production facility, a key chemical weapons
research centre and a military bunker involved in chemical
weapons attacks. Hitting these targets with the force that we have
deployed will significantly degrade the Syrian Regime’s ability to research,
develop and deploy chemical weapons” [my emphasis].
It seemed to me when I heard
these words – and the passage of time has not altered this impression – that
Mrs May was admitting to one of two actions, either of which ought to see her
removed from office.
If we take her statement at
face value, then it appears that she authorised a cruise missile strike on a
number of depots that she believed contained chemical weapons, thus risking the
dispersion of toxic chemicals into the atmosphere. It hardly needs to be
spelled out what this could have led to, especially as some of these sites were
close to residential areas.
On the other hand, if she
authorised the bombing of these facilities knowing full well that they did not
contain chemical weapons, then her public statement made after the bombing was
false.
There really are no other
options. Either she believed that these facilities contained chemical weapons,
in which case her authorisation of the bombing of them was a deeply reckless
and irresponsible act, which could have had horrendous consequences for the
people near those locations. Or she knew that they did not in fact contain chemical
weapons, in which case her statement was deliberately misleading.
According
to the Russian Ministry of Defence, the Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has been investigating one of the bombed sites, Barzah,
and has so far found no evidence of chemical weapons.
But let’s say that you don’t
take their word for this. Fine, but you are then faced with two problems:
Firstly, the OPCW, in a report
published on 23rd March, just three weeks before the US, UK and French
strikes on Syria, stated that their inspectors had found no evidence of
chemical weapons at the Barzah site when they last inspected it back in late
November:
“In accordance with paragraph
11 of Council decision EC-83/DEC.5, the second round of inspections at the
Barzah and Jamrayah facilities of the SSRC was concluded on 22 November 2017. The
results of the inspections were reported as an addendum (EC-87/DG.15/Add.1,
dated 28 February 2018) to the report entitled “Status of Implementation of
Executive Council Decision EC-83/DEC.5 (dated 11 November 2016)” (EC-87/DG.15,
dated 23 February 2018). The analysis of samples taken during the inspections
did not indicate the presence of scheduled chemicals in the samples, and the
inspection team did not observe any activities inconsistent with obligations
under the Convention [Chemical Weapons Convention] during the second round of
inspections at the Barzah and Jamrayah facilities.”
But the second problem you
have is this: If the Russian MoD is wrong, or spreading false information, and
the OPCW has now found evidence of chemical weapons at Barzah, this would only
go to show that Theresa May, along with her US and French counterparts,
recklessly bombed a chemical weapons facility, without any certainty that it
would not result in catastrophic consequences for people in the neighbourhood.
Unless of course someone can
come up with a scenario whereby cruise missiles can be dropped “safely” on a
chemical weapons depot with a guarantee that the toxic substances held there
would not become a danger to people in the surrounding neighbourhoods.
So its as simple as this: If
the OPCW report of 23rd March, and the Russian MoD claims made
on 25thApril are true, then Theresa May misled the public when she
claimed that the missiles she authorised had targeted and hit chemical weapons
facilities. If the OPCW report of 23rd March, and the
Russian MoD claims made on 25th April are false,
then Theresa May knowingly authorised the targeting of chemical weapons
storage facilities, which could have had catastrophic consequences for innocent
people.
Here’s the question that someone
in Parliament needs to ask her:
“Prime Minister, on April 14th
you authorised the bombing of three sites in Syria, which you claimed were
developing and storing chemical weapons. Had this action caused the release of
toxic substances into the atmosphere, would you have taken full responsibility
for any resulting fatalities in the area?”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.