Britain should extend RAF airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq to Syria because it is “a bit strange and a bit artificial” to impose restrictions on the fight against the terrorists, George Osborne has said.
As David Cameron prepared to outline the government’s comprehensive strategy on Syria to MPs, the chancellor also said Britain needed to widen its involvement in the air campaign because it was wrong to expect allies such as France to bear the burden.
The chancellor, who was a strong supporter of the Iraq war in 2003, told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 that it was now right to “deal with the direct threat” posed by Isis from its base in Syria.
Osborne said: “The RAF currently fly those missions over Iraq. Our brave pilots risk their lives keeping us safe. It is a bit strange and a bit artificial that they can’t cross over the Syrian border and take the fight to Isil in that part of its base as well.”
His call to extend military action was echoed by Sir John Sawers, a former head of Britain’s intelligence service, who gave his backing to getting “stuck in” militarily against Isis.
Osborne played down fears that an extension of the strikes from Iraq to Syria would increase the threat from Isis to the UK, because he said Britain was already a target. “I don’t think this is a country that allows others, like the French or the Americans, to defend our interests or protect us from terrorist organisations. We should contribute to that effort and I think we can bring unique capabilities to that conflict,” he said.
The chancellor made clear that the prime minister would tell MPs the government believed a diplomatic solution was also needed for Syria. “We need a political settlement in Syria, that is a massive challenge for the international community,” he said.
John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, indicated that he and Jeremy Corbyn were unlikely to vote in favour of extending the airstrikes. McDonnell told Today: “I am really sceptical about British involvement in the Middle East. I think we just need to learn the lessons from Iraq.”
He was unable to say whether the Labour leadership would impose a three-line whip on MPs or whether it would allow a free vote. Corbyn faces intense pressure from shadow cabinet ministers to impose a three-line whip in favour of airstrikes.
Sawers, who stepped down as head of MI6 in 2014, said the war in Syria meant Britain faced its “worst terrorist threat for a decade” but that attacking Isis militants would not heighten the threat.
Also speaking on Today, he said: “We can’t sit back and do nothing on Syria or treat it as just a humanitarian problem. We now have to get stuck in and try and resolve the problem.”
Sawers acknowledged that the conflict was very complex, citing Tuesday’s downing of a Russian fighter jet by Turkey. “Different countries have different agendas,” Sawers said.
But he said “certain military capabilities” meant Britain could make a difference to the conflict.
Cameron has said he plans to hold a Commons vote next week on extending airstrikes. He will make an oral statement to MPs on Thursday and then ask them to consider his proposals over the weekend before going to a full debate and vote.
Sawers urged Britain to join its allies France, the US, Turkey and Saudi Arabia in tackling the “two scourges in Syria”. He said: “One is the civil war in Syria, started by President [Bashar al-]Assad and his regime, and the second the emergence of Isis, this terrible, terrible terrorist organisation. You can’t go after one and not try and deal with the other.”
Sawers said Britain and its allies should not repeat mistakes made after the invasion of Iraq. He said a promising start had been made to a political process for changing the leadership in Syria.
“The prime minister has a very sound point when he says it is not conceivable for the Syrian people to accept President Assad in the long term. So there is going to have to be some negotiated change of the leadership in Damascus, but we also have to learn the lessons from Iraq. We reduced the Iraqi state to zero … and that clearly created a massive rebuilding problem. We have to ensure, in Syria, that the structures of the state, the armed forces and the public services, stay intact while you change the political leadership.”
Sawers said Britain should be braced for a Paris-style attack, but bombing Syria would not make such an attack more likely. “The threat is high now, but I don’t think it will be heightened simply because we are taking part in an international coalition.”
Asked whether a Paris-style attack could occur in Britain, Sawers said: “We have a lot of experience at dealing with this type of threat, but the reality is you can’t maintain a 100% record against terrorists who are constantly trying to get through your defences … the occasional shot will get through and we have to be braced for that.”
The Scottish National party appears minded to oppose airstrikes in Syria. At a meeting in Westminster, SNP MPs agreed that Cameron had not yet made a convincing case for extending military action, although they were still open to persuasion, according to party sources.
The parliamentary party of 54 MPs has taken no formal decision about which way to vote, but Angus Robertson, the SNP Westminster leader, struck a sceptical note as he questioned the prime minister in the Commons on Wednesday about his plans for peace and a postwar Syria.
The prime minister replied: “We cannot afford to wait for a political settlement in Syria before we act.”
Afterwards, Robertson said: “Reconstructing Syria will be essential to secure stability and allow refugees to return, yet the prime minister seems unaware of the UK government’s plans for reconstruction – if there are any plans at all.
