Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain

Top Menu

  • #Syria
  • #Palestine
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Comment
  • Question and Answer
  • Watch us Live

Main Menu

  • Home
  • Viewpoint
  • Islamic Culture
  • Da’wah
  • Media
  • People
    • Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabahani (Founder)
    • Sheikh Abdul Qadeem Zallum (Successor)
    • Sheikh Ata Abu Rashta (Ameer)
    • Abdul Wahid
    • Abu Yusuf
    • Jamal Harwood
    • Taji Mustafa
  • Youth
  • #Syria
  • #Palestine
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Comment
  • Question and Answer
  • Watch us Live

logo

Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain

  • Home
  • Viewpoint
    • When I met Salman Rushdie...

      February 14, 2019
      0
    • LGBT Lessons: Sexualisation Can Only Harm Children Not Help Them

      February 14, 2019
      0
    • Visit to Bangladesh

      January 28, 2019
      0
    • Strategic Estimate 2019

      January 20, 2019
      0
    • In-depth: What Next for Mohammed bin Salman?

      January 18, 2019
      0
    • Halal meat on the chopping block again!

      January 7, 2019
      0
    • The French React to A Decade of Austerity

      December 28, 2018
      0
    • The Gatwick Drone Chaos

      December 28, 2018
      0
    • Grooming: Are Asians to Blame?

      December 21, 2018
      0
  • Islamic Culture
    • Tafseer: Surah Al-Qadr

      June 11, 2018
      0
    • Rajab: A Momentous History

      April 7, 2018
      0
    • 3rd March 1924 – Why Does It Matter?

      March 3, 2018
      0
    • Patience in Islam

      Benefits of patience (sabr)

      February 12, 2018
      0
    • If you help (in the cause of) Allah, He will help you, ...

      January 22, 2018
      0
    • Tafsir: Surah Al-Asr

      January 1, 2018
      0
    • Lessons from the miraculous birth of Isa (as)

      December 25, 2017
      0
    • Man Praying mosque red carpet

      Islam: Finding peace through Submission to none but Allah

      December 11, 2017
      0
    • Significance of Rabi’ul-Awwal

      November 24, 2017
      0
  • Da’wah
    • The State in Jordan Leads the People to Destruction through Riba-based Financing

      January 8, 2019
      0
    • Event review: Bangladesh National Election 2018

      December 20, 2018
      0
    • UN Reports Reveal the Truth of the Anglo-American Conflict in Yemen and ...

      September 9, 2018
      0
    • PICKET : Muslim women calling for Islam abducted?!

      August 27, 2018
      0
    • Pakistan’s Rulers Now Abduct Women

      August 16, 2018
      0
    • #FreeSisterRomana

      August 6, 2018
      0
    • Youth campaign launch

      August 2, 2018
      0
    • Youth Campaign Launch - Letter to Imams and Influentials

      July 29, 2018
      0
    • National Event: Only the Khilafah System can end the Misery of Democracy ...

      July 11, 2018
      0
  • Media
  • People
    • Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabahani (Founder)
    • Sheikh Abdul Qadeem Zallum (Successor)
    • Sheikh Ata Abu Rashta (Ameer)
    • Abdul Wahid
    • Abu Yusuf
    • Jamal Harwood
    • Taji Mustafa
  • Youth
SyriaViewpoint
Home›Syria›Britain bombing Syria will not help the suffering of Syrians

Britain bombing Syria will not help the suffering of Syrians

By Abdul Wahid
November 28, 2015
907
0
Share:

Britain bombing Syria will neither help the suffering of ordinary Syrians nor the national security of the UK, writes Dr Abdul Wahid.

Prime Minister David Cameron has laid out his case for bombing Syria, largely drawing on the emotional reaction to the Paris attacks earlier this month. He has argued “intelligence” estimates from the Joint Intelligence Committee – the organisation that got it so wrong in Iraq – suggest 70,000 ground troops in the “Free Syrian Army” (FSA) – a coalition that is supposed to be fighting Assad’s regime – will move in, supported by US-UK-French-Russian airstrikes.

He has offered no plausible political solution after the war. Yet a majority of MPs look set to support him next week when he calls for a Commons vote.

There are so many reasons against British military engagement in Syria, which the general public ought to consider.

Here are just a few questions that need to be asked:

What is the bombing supposed to achieve?

It is said to be aimed at degrading ISIS’s military capability. So far the bombing led by the US and Russia has not been focussed on ISIS. In fact, quite often it has been focussed on ISIS’s rival groups –most often by Russia, but also by the rest – who oppose Bashar al Assad, but who have been labelled “extremists” because of their Islamic sentiments.

In over a year, the number of civilian deaths is estimated between 682-2,057 from the US-led bombing. ISIS are no weaker than they were before. So, this aim needs to be questioned. Is it just ISIS that is being targeted, or is there a wider motive?

What is the root cause of the problems in Syria?

ISIS is bad, but Assad is far worse. Most of the estimated 300,000 people killed, and 4 million refugees have been as a direct result of the actions of the Assad regime. The first beheadings, mutilations and atrocities – and by far the larger number – were committed by a secular, Ba’athist ally of Washington, London, Paris and Moscow, who stood by him as the numbers of victims rose into six figures.

ISIS has made enemies of almost every sincere group fighting Assad; most of them devout Muslims – it fought them more than it fought the regime – but those same fighting groups and the Syrian opposition see Assad as the bigger threat. So, it is hard to see how bombing ISIS will deal with the greater evil – and could easily be argued to be helping the regime, particularly if the so-called FSA are expected to redirect their efforts on the ground.

Will the bombing reduce the “ISIS threat” to Britain?

Assuming for the sake of argument everything we are told about the “ISIS threat” to Britain is true – and not being exaggerated to justify greater powers for the state to push through draconian policies against Muslims – it’s hard to see how a military response is the right way to deal with what is effectively a threat to law and order in the UK.

Criminal acts, even on a massive scale, aren’t ordinarily dealt with by aerial bombardment. Even if you argue ISIS are quasi-state actors, asymmetric warfare doesn’t rely on responding to the aerial bombardment. And given the attackers in Paris cited France’s engagement in Syria as a reason to attack – and given that British security officials argued the security threat to the UK escalated after the 2003 Iraq conflict – it seems bombing Syria is exactly the wrong thing to do, killing more civilians (which will inevitably happen), and making a bigger mess in the region.

What is the end game?

When Cameron talks of a post-conflict Syria – with a broad-based government, with elements of the regime as well as acceptable members of the opposition – he could be accused of living in a parallel universe.

At the outset of the conflict, the Syrian people very soon learned who it was that the “international community” were backing – and it wasn’t them. Yet, against the odds, they managed to stand up to the tyrant – and they thanked Allah (swt) for that. They embraced an Islamic identity because they learned to trust in Allah (swt) – and because they started considering a post-Assad scenario.

The various conferences over the years have all been to try to find an opposition that is acceptable and subservient to the West, that might be acceptable to the Syrian people – and even those efforts came after the eleventh hour. To this day it hasn’t happened.

ISIS has hindered and not helped the opposition to the Assad regime, as has infighting between the groups.

But now its part is nothing more than an excuse to allow external powers to intervene to shape its future in their image – an image that excludes Islam, which forms such an integral part of the region’s belief and history.

Long term, it will not work. Sykes-Picot was almost a century ago and has failed to stabilise what was formerly a stable region.

Short term, there will be more death and misery for the people of Syria – and more of British tax-payers’ money spent on yet another neo-colonial venture.

Dr Abdul Wahid is a regular contributor to New Civilisation. He is currently the Chairman of the UK-Executive Committee of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain. He has been published in The Times Higher Educational Supplement and on the websites of Foreign Affairs, Open Democracy and the Prospect Magazine.

@AbdulWahidHT

TagsSyria
Previous Article

Cameron’s drive to bomb Syria is macho, ...

Next Article

Message to Mr Cameron: Bomb us or ...

0
Shares
  • 0
  • +
  • 0

Related articles More from author

  • SyriaViewpoint

    Video Trailer – March to support the uprising in Syria

    February 11, 2012
    By Editor
  • CommentSyria

    Muslim rulers are guilty as much as Bashar al-Assad in the Chemical Attack

    April 4, 2017
    By Editor
  • News Watch

    Syria conflict: Aid convoy hit by ‘air strike’ near Aleppo

    September 19, 2016
    By News Desk
  • SyriaViewpoint

    Hizb ut-Tahrir: Arab league Observers in Syria – Deaf, dumb and blind

    January 3, 2012
    By Editor
  • InfographicsSyria

    Call to action for Ghouta

    February 25, 2018
    By Editor
  • SyriaViewpoint

    The 5 Biggest Myths on the Syrian uprising

    September 29, 2013
    By Editor

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Latest Video

VideosYouth

Bad boy whip…

Status - what you stand for, or what you sit in?
  • Conor McGregor: a poster boy for ‘freedom’

    By Editor
    October 13, 2018
  • #IDLIB FLASH MOB: Saudi/Turkish Embassy

    By Editor
    October 13, 2018

Latest Articles

Viewpoint

When I met Salman Rushdie…

Many Muslims of my age will tell you about their Rushdie experiences around 30 years ago - and how it was a defining moment for them in their Islamic identity.
  • LGBT Lessons: Sexualisation Can Only Harm Children Not Help Them

    By Editor
    February 14, 2019
  • Visit to Bangladesh

    By Editor
    January 28, 2019

Follow Us

  • 15211
    Followers
  • 23707
    Likes
  • 2143
    Subscribers