Statement from Prime Minister Theresa May on Syria Air Strikes
Last night British, French and American armed forces conducted
co-ordinated and targeted strikes to degrade the Syrian Regime’s
chemical weapons capability and deter their use. For
the UK’s part four RAF Tornado GR 4’s launched storm shadow
missiles at a military facility some 15 miles west of Homs, where
the regime is assessed to keep chemical weapons in breach of
Syria’s obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention.
While the full...Request free trial
Last night British, French and American armed forces conducted
co-ordinated and targeted strikes to degrade the Syrian Regime’s
chemical weapons capability and deter their use.
For the UK’s part four RAF Tornado GR 4’s launched storm shadow
missiles at a military facility some 15 miles west of Homs, where
the regime is assessed to keep chemical weapons in breach of
Syria’s obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention.
While the full assessment of the strike is ongoing, we are
confident of its success.
Let me set out why we have taken this action.
Last Saturday up to 75 people, including young children, were
killed in a despicable and barbaric attack in Douma, with as many
as 500 further casualties.
We have worked with our allies to establish what happened. And
all the indications are that this was a chemical weapons
attack.
We have seen the harrowing images of men, women and children
lying dead with foam in their mouths.
These were innocent families who, at the time this chemical
weapon was unleashed, were seeking shelter underground, in
basements.
First-hand accounts from NGOs and aid workers have detailed the
most horrific suffering, including burns to the eyes, suffocation
and skin discolouration, with a chlorine-like odour surrounding
the victims.
And the World Health Organisation has received reports that
hundreds of patients arrived at Syrian heath facilities on
Saturday night with “signs and symptoms consistent with exposure
to toxic chemicals.”
We are also clear about who was responsible for this
atrocity.
A significant body of information including intelligence
indicates the Syrian Regime is responsible for this latest
attack.
I cannot tell you everything. But let me give an example of some of the evidence that leads us to this conclusion.
Open source accounts allege that a barrel bomb was used to
deliver the chemicals.
Multiple open source reports claim that a Regime helicopter was
observed above the city of Douma on the evening of
7th April.
The Opposition does not operate helicopters or use barrel bombs.
And reliable intelligence indicates that Syrian military
officials co-ordinated what appears to be the use of chlorine in
Douma on 7th April.
No other group could have carried out this attack. Indeed, Daesh
for example does not even have a presence in Douma.
And the fact of this attack should surprise no-one.
We know that the Syrian regime has an utterly abhorrent record of
using chemical weapons against its own people.
On 21st August 2013 over 800 people were killed
and thousands more injured in a chemical attack also in Ghouta.
There were 14 further smaller scale chemical attacks prior to
that summer.
At Khan Shaykhun on 4th April last year, the
Syrian Regime used sarin against its people killing around 100
with a further 500 casualties.
And based on the Regime's persistent pattern of behaviour and the
cumulative analysis of specific incidents we judge it highly
likely both that the Syrian regime has continued to use chemical
weapons since then, and will continue to do so.
This must be stopped.
We have sought to do so using every possible diplomatic
channel.
But our efforts have been repeatedly thwarted both on the ground
and in the United Nations.
Following the sarin attack in Eastern Damascus back in August
2013, the Syrian Regime committed to dismantle its chemical
weapon programme - and Russia promised to ensure that Syria did
this, overseen by the Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons.
But these commitments have not been met.
A recent report from the Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons has said that Syria’s declaration of its former
Chemical Weapons programme is incomplete.
This indicates that it continues to retain undeclared stocks of
nerve agent or precursor chemicals – and is likely to be
continuing with some chemical weapons production.
The OPCW inspectors have investigated previous attacks and on
four occasions decided that the Regime was indeed responsible.
And on each occasion when we have seen every sign of chemical
weapons being used, any attempt to hold the perpetrators to
account has been blocked by Russia at the UN Security Council,
with six such vetoes since the start of 2017.
Just this week, the Russians vetoed a draft Resolution that would
have established an independent investigation into this latest
attack – even making the grotesque and absurd claim that it was
“staged” by Britain.
So we have no choice but to conclude that diplomatic action on
its own will not be any more effective in the future than it has
been in the past.
Over the last week the UK government has been working intensively
with our international partners to build the evidence picture,
and to consider what action we need to take to prevent and deter
future humanitarian catastrophes caused by chemical weapons
attacks.
When the Cabinet met on Thursday we considered the advice of the
Attorney General, the National Security Adviser and the Chief of
the Defence Staff – and we were updated on the latest assessment
and intelligence picture.
And based on this advice we agreed that it was both right and
legal to take military action, together with our closest allies,
to alleviate further humanitarian suffering by degrading the
Syrian Regime’s Chemical Weapons capability and deterring their
use.
This was not about interfering in a civil war.
And it was not about regime change.
As I discussed with President Trump and President Macron, it was
a limited, targeted and effective strike with clear boundaries
that expressly sought to avoid escalation and did everything
possible to prevent civilian casualties.
Together we have hit a specific and limited set of targets. They
were a chemical weapons storage and production facility, a key
chemical weapons research centre and a military bunker involved
in chemical weapons attacks.
Hitting these targets with the force that we have deployed will
significantly degrade the Syrian Regime’s ability to research,
develop and deploy chemical weapons.
A year ago, after the atrocity at Khan Shaykhun, the US conducted
a strike on the airfield from which the attack took place. But
Assad and his regime hasn’t stopped their use of chemical
weapons.
So last night’s strikes by the US, UK and France were
significantly larger than the US action a year ago and
specifically designed to have a greater impact on the regime’s
capability and willingness to use chemical weapons.
And this collective action sends a clear message that the
international community will not stand by and tolerate the use of
chemical weapons.
I also want to be clear that this military action to deter the
use of chemical weapons does not stand alone.
We must remain committed to resolving the conflict at
large.
The best hope for the Syrian people remains a political
solution.
We need all partners – especially the Regime and its backers – to
enable humanitarian access to those in desperate need.
And the UK will continue to strive for both.
But these strikes are about deterring the barbaric use of
chemical weapons in Syria and beyond.
And so to achieve this there must also be a wider diplomatic
effort – including the full range of political and economic
levers - to strengthen the global norms prohibiting the use of
chemical weapons which have stood for nearly a century.
Although of a much lower order of magnitude, the use of a nerve
agent on the streets of the UK in recent weeks is part of a
pattern of disregard for these norms.
So while this action is specifically about deterring the Syrian
regime, it will also send a clear signal to anyone else who
believes they can use chemical weapons with impunity.
There is no graver decision for a Prime Minister than to commit
our forces to combat – and this is the first time that I have had
to do so.
As always, they have served our country with the greatest
professionalism and bravery - and we owe them a huge debt of
gratitude.
We would have preferred an alternative path.
But on this occasion there is none.
We cannot allow the use of chemical weapons to become normalised
– either within Syria, on the streets of the UK or elsewhere.
We must reinstate the global consensus that chemical weapons
cannot be used.
This action is absolutely in Britain’s national interest.
The lesson of history is that when the global rules and standards
that keep us safe come under threat – we must take a stand and
defend them.
That is what our country has always done.
And that is what we will continue to do.
|