Here is his response
Dear
Mr Franklin
Thank
you for contacting me regarding the recent decision by the UK Government,
alongside the US and France, to target three chemical weapons facilities in
Syria following a poison gas attack in the town of Douma. l am very grateful to
hear your concerns over this most important and pressing issue.
l
have carefully considered the correspondence l have recieved in the past few
days and thought I would provide a comprehensive response which responds to the
various points raised with me during this time.
I believe the Prime Minister was right to take decisive action following the
horrendous attack in Douma given the consensus in the international community
that the use of chemical weapons on civilians should be met with targeted, but
severe repercussions. The Prime Minister, following detailed military and
secret intelligence briefings, assessed that the UK should join our close
allies to make absolutely clear to President Assad that we will not sit idly by
and allow these atrocities to take place without consequence.
I understand the concerns raised about the lack of a specific parliamentary vote
beforehand. However, this is not required for all forms of military action, and
our Government acted in line with legal advice. The Government has ensured that
Parliament can scrutinise this decision; with significant time set aside for
debate. Furthermore, the Prime Minister has said she took this course of action
in the knowledge that Parliament would hold her to account, and she has
received support from across the House.
Western
leaders continue to seek a diplomatic solution to the Syrian Civil War, and an
important part of this was an agreement to eliminate Assad's chemical weapons
programme following the attack on civilians in Ghouta in 2013. Since this time,
the OPCW has not been able to verify whether all manufacturing, storage and
research facilities were in fact destroyed.
On
each occasion when chemical weapons have been used in Syria, Russia has blocked
any attempt to hold the perpetrators to account at the UN Security Council,
with six such vetoes since the start of 2017. Just last week, Russia blocked a
UN resolution to establish an independent investigation able to determine responsibility
for the attack in Douma. This is why a response via the UN was sadly not
possible. To say the government should not have acted without this
authorisation is to say that dictators should be free to murder people with
impunity, as long as they have a protector on the Security Council. I do not
believe any of us wish to live in a world where this is the norm.
The
use of chemical weapons is completely illegal, but these rules are worth
nothing without the willingness to take action against those who use such
weapons. If the international community does
not
punish the perpetrators, we are all made less safe, as we send out the message
that there are no consequences for such wicked criminal behaviour.
Just
as we cannot allow the use of chemical weapons in Syria to be deployed without
consequence,we cannot allow the use of deadly nerve agents here in Britain.
Sergei Skipal could easily have decided to settle
in a larger cathedral city, such as York, and it could have been a North
Yorkshire Police officer admitted to intensive care.
Throughout
this incident, the Kremlin made light of the situation and denied all
involvement. This
represents
Russia's total disregard for international cooperation and tendency to employ
misinformation.
The
unrelenting civil war is now in its seventh year and we still face
repercussions from the immense destruction. Our response to this crisis has
been unprecedented, committing £2.6b since 2012 to meet
the
immediate needs of vulnerable people in Syria and refugees in the region. This
makes us the second largest bilateral donor.
The
UK resettled more refugees than any other country in the EU in 2016 and our
approach has
thankfully
discouraged people from undertaking perilous journeys that have too often
proven to be fatal.
Our
country will continue to provide a comprehensive humanitarian package for those
caught up in the conflict, coupled with supporting a united international
consensus around punishing the use of chemical weapons. I firmly believe that
the ordinary citizens of Syria should be our primary concern and this should
drive our approach to this conflict, whilst sewing the UK's national
interest.
Once
again I am grateful for your thoughts on this challenging area and fully
appreciate the level of
concern
on all sides of this debate. If there are any further points you feel it would
be helpful for me to respond to or address then please do not hesitate to let
me know.
Thank
you again for your correspondence.
Yours sincerely
Julian Sturdy
No comments:
Post a Comment