Please Do What You Can Now to Halt this Rush to War

I am moved to
write what follows by a terrible feeling of powerlessness as the government of
my country rushes towards a war for which it knows it has no mandate.

 

It appears that a
decision has already been taken in Washington DC to launch some sort of attack on
Syria. It also seems that the British government wishes to join in that attack.
The House of Commons has been recalled but the behaviour of the Opposition
Leader (and of the leader of the Liberal Democrats) suggests that they are not
prepared to question this involvement with any vigour. If British people wish
to oppose this bizarre and perilous adventure, it is therefore up to them to
contact their MPs directly.

 

This posting is
designed to help them to do so, calmly, reasonably, politely and logically
while there is yet time. A decisive vote against British involvement is still
quite possible, and would be an important demonstration of national maturity
and responsibility, as well as a permanent check on the incurable enthusiasm of
some politicians for war and its alleged glamour and glory.

 

Here are some
arguments which you might wish to use, if and when (as I urge you to ) you
contact your MP in the next two days.

 

It is being
suggested (as it always is) that the planned attack will be precise, surgical,
proportionate etc etc etc.

 

The truth is that
nobody ever really knows the final consequence of any act of violence.  Violence generally results in retaliation,
which in this case might take many unpredictable forms.

 

Wars often begin
with minor incidents, minor anyway to start with, which then bleed without ceasing
until they have spread a vast red stain on much of the surface of the Earth.
They are often begun on the basis of mistaken information, or indeed of lies.
They are often begun by credulity, by emotionalism and by the failure of
responsible persons to see through propaganda.

 

That is why
thoughtful people hesitate greatly before even contemplating such acts,
generally preferring to do them only in self-defence. When the violence
involves a military attack on a sovereign country with which we are not at war,
the matter is still more risky.

 

Precision warfare
is a myth. On several occasions, supposedly super-accurate airstrikes on Libya
resulted in the undisputed deaths of several entirely innocent people,
including small children. Our attacks on Belgrade during the Kosovo crisis
killed such dangerous persons as a make-up lady at Serbian national TV
headquarters. If our concern is for the innocent, the launch of bombs and
missiles is an odd way of showing it.

 

The moral clothing
in which this attack is dressed is a mass of rags and tatters. The very same
people demanding punishment for the Syrian state (including the discredited
Anthony Blair) are those who defend or overlook the terrible mass killings by the
Egyptian government. That government, which came to power in a blatant military
coup, has  - and I put this at its
mildest – no more legitimacy than the government in Damascus. What is more,
there is no dispute at all about who is responsible for the recent mass
shootings of demonstrators in Egypt. Yet neitehr Washington nor London (who claim to be abe to descry Syria's guilt by some sort of magic process) will even concede that a putsch has taken place in Cairo.

 

If we are outraged
by governments that kill their own people, our outrage cannot be selective and
aimed at only one government which does this. If it is selective, then it is
false and has another purpose. What is that purpose? We are not told.

 

At the time of
writing, the United Nations teams have barely begun their investigation into
the episode. The Syrian government deny their involvement. There is no proof
that they are lying. It is far from impossible to believe that the rebels have
resorted to such weapons. In fact, it makes far more sense for them to have
done so than for the Syrian government. That government has the upper hand in its civil
war at present. It knows perfectly well that proof of its complicity in
the use of poison gas will open it to attack. It also knows that such proof will remove the protection it has
had up till now from the UN Security Council and the Russian-Chinese veto.

 

 

The rush to take
action before those teams have reported is frighteningly reminiscent of the
rush to attack Iraq, and the withdrawal of Hans Blix’s inspection teams from
that country, which were of course on the point of discovering that there were
no Weapons of Mass Destruction.

 

Governments simply
cannot be trusted to act wisely or responsibly in such matters. They have repeatedly shown this in recent years. That is why we
have a Parliament and a free press, to scrutinize and question such things.
What is the rush? Why are we having the sentence first, and the evidence and
the verdict afterwards? Mr Cameron should be told he cannot have his war until
he has proof that it is justified, and until he can show that the actions that
he plans are in the interests of this country.

 

Please do what you
can, while you can.  There are many
honourable reasons for opposing this attack. Whether you are of the Left or
Right, liberal or conservative, 
Christian, of another faith or without faith,  patriot or internationalist, all can unite on
the simple issues of preferring truth to falsehood, calm justice to wild,
flailing vengeance , and careful deliberation  to rush to judgement.

 

Please, do what
you can to stop this.