Labour on Iraq and Syria: No Contradiction

With the Cabinet meeting today and Parliament being recalled tomorrow, it looks as if British forces will again be committed in the Middle East, possibly as early as this weekend. Contrary to its position prior to the Syria debate last August, however, following a meeting of the Shadow Cabinet yesterday Labour has already announced that it will support the Coalition on air strikes against Daesh (ISIS) in Iraq. Labour’s position appears to be popular with the public but is it wise and what affect might it have on Labour’s foreign policy credibility? Already critics are claiming that today’s policy cannot be reconciled with last year’s not to support attacks against the regime of Bashir Al-Assad.

There are, however, obvious differences between the two situations. Daesh poses a direct threat to the UK. Assad’s regime, loathsome though it is, did and does not. In addition to Daesh’s attempts to overthrow a friendly foreign government and its destabilising effects on the region, it holds and has murdered British hostages and is training British ‘foreign fighters’ who may seek to direct their newly-acquired skills at targets nearer home. Ed Miliband is right to say that the group is ‘a threat to the UK’s national interest’ which merits a military response.

The legal position is also clearer as regards attacking Daesh. The UK has received a formal request from PM Haider Al-Abadi of Iraq for military assistance. Unlike intervention for humanitarian purposes, the legality of which is heavily disputed, intervention on the invitation of a State’s government is generally recognised to be lawful.

Indeed, it is this distinction which separates the situation as regards Daesh in Iraq and in Syria. It has been argued that it is incoherent to fight Daesh in Iraq but not in Syria. And there are legal arguments that strikes against Daesh in Syria would be permissible. However, they are much more controversial. Forcible humanitarian intervention is not viewed as lawful by the majority of States in the world today, whilst the International Court of Justice has stated that military action against non-State armed groups cannot be justified on the basis of self-defence. That a Security Council resolution should be sought before attacking Daesh in Syria is thus both good law and good policy, and Labour is right not to give the Coalition a blank cheque on the issue.

Labour’s policy displays both due attention to the national interest and a proper regard for international law and international opinion. As such, it is entirely consistent with the position taken on Syria last year, as well as continuing the Labour tradition that foreign policy should have an ethical dimension.

Matthew Happold is a member of Labour International and the Lëtzebuerger Sozialistesch Arbechterpartei