Syria crisis: David Cameron's plea to MPs over evidence

MPs are debating a government motion which could pave the way for military action in Syria following a chemical attack near Damascus.

David Cameron said he was convinced the Assad regime was behind the attack and there was a "clear legal basis" for targeted strikes to save lives.

But he understood public cynicism about it after "the Iraq episode".

Labour's Ed Miliband said he was not against intervention but more evidence was needed to give it "legitimacy".

MPs had been recalled from their summer break early to vote on whether the UK should join in US-led strikes on Syria, if they go ahead.

'Abhorrent'
But the prime minister was forced to water down the government's motion after Labour refused to back it and a second vote will now be needed to authorise military strikes.

BBC political correspondent Iain Watson said a further recall of Parliament over the weekend had not been ruled out - as a report by UN inspectors, currently in Damascus, could go to the Security Council as early as Saturday.

Continue reading the main story
image of Nick Robinson
Analysis
Nick Robinson
Political editor
“
Start Quote

Obama is said to have wanted to act before leaving the US for a foreign trip next Tuesday - If he still wants to stick to that timetable, Britain will no longer be with him”

Read more from Nick
Setting out the government's case at the beginning of a special Commons debate, Mr Cameron described last week's attack on the outskirts of Damascus as "one of the most abhorrent uses of chemical weapons in a century, slaughtering innocent men, women and children".

He said: "Interfering in another country's affairs should not be undertaken except in the most exceptional circumstances. It must be a humanitarian catastrophe and it must be a last resort.

"But by any standards, this is a humanitarian catastrophe, and if there are no consequences for it there is nothing to stop Assad and other dictators from using these weapons again and again."

He said it was "not about taking sides in the conflict, it's not about invading, it's not about regime change or indeed working more closely with the (Syrian) Opposition" but it was about responding to a "war crime".

Continue reading the main story
Labour and the Syrian crisis

How Labour's position on Syria has developed this week:

Monday: Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander asked for a recall of Parliament saying he would "expect the prime minister to make his case to Parliament" before a decision was made about UK involvement.
Tuesday: Ed Miliband said there was a "lot of evidence" pointing to the past use of chemical weapons by the Assad's regime but any international response must be legally sound and be based on precise, achievable objectives. He did not mention the UN.
Wednesday morning: Mr Alexander stressed the need to see evidence from UN weapons inspectors.
Wednesday evening: At 17:15 BST Mr Miliband called the prime minister and said he could not promise support for the government's motion and would table amendment.
Wednesday evening: Labour published an amendment calling for "compelling evidence" that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons before agreeing to support a military response.
Thursday: Labour says it will vote against the government's "opaque" motion.
In a swipe at his Labour predecessor Tony Blair, he said "the well of public opinion has been well and truly poisoned by the Iraq episode".

But he insisited the current crisis was not like Iraq and MPs would "decide which next steps" the UK would take.

Labour leader Ed Miliband told MPs he was not against military intervention. But he said Britain had to be "clear eyed" about the possible consequences of such action - including deepening Britain's involvement in Syria's bitter civil war.

'Moral authority'
He said Britain should not make the decision based on an "artificial timetable or political timetable set elsewhere" but should go through a "sequential road map" of events set out in his party's amendment to the government's motion - which includes gathering "compelling evidence" that President Assad's regime was to blame for last week's attack.

He said the way the decision was made would "determine the legitimacy and moral authority" of any action the UK undertook.

"I'm not with those who rule out action - the horrific events unfolding in Syria do ask us to consider the options available. But we owe it to the Syrian people, to our own country and to the future security of our world to scrutinise any plans on the basis of the consequences they have."

Downing Street has released a statement, based on legal advice by the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, that states limited military strikes to deter future chemical weapons attacks would be in line with international law.

An assessment published by the Joint Intelligence Committee also argued it was "not possible for the opposition to have carried out a chemical weapons attack on this scale".

But Labour MPs will vote against the government's motion later, tabling their own amendment saying there must be "compelling evidence" that the Syrian regime was responsible for the use of chemical weapons.

A Commons vote is expected around 2200 BST. The House of Lords is also debating the motion but will not vote.

BBC Political Editor Nick Robinson said he believed the government would still win Thursday night's vote - partly because Conservative MPs would be unwilling to hand Labour a victory.

Syria has accused the West of "inventing" excuses to launch a strike and says a UK strike would be an "aggressive and unprovoked act of war".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23862114