This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/27/parliament-and-syria-in-the-shadow-of-iraq

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
MPs and Syria: in the shadow of Iraq MPs and Syria: in the shadow of Iraq
(25 days later)
"I may not have succeeded in halting the war, but I did secure the right of parliament to decide on war." The words are inscribed on the Edinburgh gravestone of the late Robin Cook, the most senior minister to resign over the war against Iraq in 2003. Yet Mr Cook now has a living epitaph too. NeitherThursday's recall of parliament to debate the crisis in Syria, nor the vote on a government motion that will take place at the debate's end, would be happening without Iraq and its enduring legacy. In the 21st century, as the Iraq crisis showed, wars of choice are politically unrealistic without parliamentary authorisation. This is a kind of progress – and Mr Cook had a big hand in it – even though the precedent has been unevenly followed since 2003."I may not have succeeded in halting the war, but I did secure the right of parliament to decide on war." The words are inscribed on the Edinburgh gravestone of the late Robin Cook, the most senior minister to resign over the war against Iraq in 2003. Yet Mr Cook now has a living epitaph too. NeitherThursday's recall of parliament to debate the crisis in Syria, nor the vote on a government motion that will take place at the debate's end, would be happening without Iraq and its enduring legacy. In the 21st century, as the Iraq crisis showed, wars of choice are politically unrealistic without parliamentary authorisation. This is a kind of progress – and Mr Cook had a big hand in it – even though the precedent has been unevenly followed since 2003.
Iraq overshadows this week's developments at Westminster at every turn. Accountability of this kind improves our democracy, our politics and our system of government. Nevertheless, neither the parliamentary recall nor the MPs' vote is enough on its own. Both are welcome but not sufficient. For one thing, although politicians of all parties have often talked since 2003 about reforming Britain's antiquated prerogative war powers, nothing has actually been done. The Syrian crisis means ministers should return to that task as a priority. Yet what ultimately matters is not the involvement of MPs, important though that is, but the decision that they actually take.Iraq overshadows this week's developments at Westminster at every turn. Accountability of this kind improves our democracy, our politics and our system of government. Nevertheless, neither the parliamentary recall nor the MPs' vote is enough on its own. Both are welcome but not sufficient. For one thing, although politicians of all parties have often talked since 2003 about reforming Britain's antiquated prerogative war powers, nothing has actually been done. The Syrian crisis means ministers should return to that task as a priority. Yet what ultimately matters is not the involvement of MPs, important though that is, but the decision that they actually take.
Here again, the shadow of Iraq over our politics looms large. There can be no disputing the seriousness of any use of heinous and internationally outlawed chemical weapons. Yet tomorrow's debate will only even begin to carry public credibility if it is based on clear and persuasive information about their alleged use by the Syrian government. That information may well exist – much of the evidence points in that direction. Yet the case has not yet been made authoritatively to the public.Here again, the shadow of Iraq over our politics looms large. There can be no disputing the seriousness of any use of heinous and internationally outlawed chemical weapons. Yet tomorrow's debate will only even begin to carry public credibility if it is based on clear and persuasive information about their alleged use by the Syrian government. That information may well exist – much of the evidence points in that direction. Yet the case has not yet been made authoritatively to the public.
This explains, in part, why the public remains so strongly opposed to British intervention or military aid to the Syrian rebels, even after the chemical attacks in Damascus. Ten years on from Iraq, the public is rightly sceptical. David Cameron began making his case for targeted retaliatory and deterrent action last night. But he should be under no illusions that a post-Iraq public will be easily persuaded that another UK military engagement in the Middle East is necessary.This explains, in part, why the public remains so strongly opposed to British intervention or military aid to the Syrian rebels, even after the chemical attacks in Damascus. Ten years on from Iraq, the public is rightly sceptical. David Cameron began making his case for targeted retaliatory and deterrent action last night. But he should be under no illusions that a post-Iraq public will be easily persuaded that another UK military engagement in the Middle East is necessary.
The prime minister also needs to explain – and MPs should make sure to tax him over this – why any such action needs to be taken now, without pause or delay. This is especially needful because no equivalent urgency has been displayed, for a range of good and bad reasons, during the past two years of deepening civil war. Moreover, the UN's weapons inspection team in Damascus has scarcely been able to conduct a thorough investigation, let alone to draw up a measured indictment against those who should be held responsible. This is another loud echo of 2003.The prime minister also needs to explain – and MPs should make sure to tax him over this – why any such action needs to be taken now, without pause or delay. This is especially needful because no equivalent urgency has been displayed, for a range of good and bad reasons, during the past two years of deepening civil war. Moreover, the UN's weapons inspection team in Damascus has scarcely been able to conduct a thorough investigation, let alone to draw up a measured indictment against those who should be held responsible. This is another loud echo of 2003.
Yet if Mr Cameron is going to shift the UK domestic debate in favour of military action of any kind in Syria he will need to win other arguments that have so far defeated him. He needs to come up with a clear statement of how military action in Syria will be proportionate, legally sound and, above all, foreseeably finite. Tony Blair may have persuaded parliament to go to war in 2003, but he later lost parliament's confidence because, in the end, things went so much worse than had been foreseen. Mr Blair's legacy to Mr Cameron is that his successor can expect no benefit of the doubt.Yet if Mr Cameron is going to shift the UK domestic debate in favour of military action of any kind in Syria he will need to win other arguments that have so far defeated him. He needs to come up with a clear statement of how military action in Syria will be proportionate, legally sound and, above all, foreseeably finite. Tony Blair may have persuaded parliament to go to war in 2003, but he later lost parliament's confidence because, in the end, things went so much worse than had been foreseen. Mr Blair's legacy to Mr Cameron is that his successor can expect no benefit of the doubt.
British politics was dreadfully damaged by the Iraq war, in spite of Mr Cook's heroic efforts and example. Ten years on, our politicians and our parliamentary institutions are objects of wide contempt, a process that can be said to have begun with Iraq. By venturing back on to this territory, Mr Cameron is taking an immense risk, not just with his own standing but with the reputation of politics more generally. The consequences will be felt most in already suffering Syria. But they may also be truly daunting for Britain itself.British politics was dreadfully damaged by the Iraq war, in spite of Mr Cook's heroic efforts and example. Ten years on, our politicians and our parliamentary institutions are objects of wide contempt, a process that can be said to have begun with Iraq. By venturing back on to this territory, Mr Cameron is taking an immense risk, not just with his own standing but with the reputation of politics more generally. The consequences will be felt most in already suffering Syria. But they may also be truly daunting for Britain itself.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.