Indeed, some of the people pressing for
bombing now are putting it about that, had we bombed the
Assad regime two years ago, Syria would not have
descended into the chaos we see today.
How are they getting on in Libya?
We are now being asked to extend the
activity of manned British aircraft into Syria:
a tiny tactical level contribution – unless you are
on the receiving end of a bomb – which we are asked to
believe will transform the strategic situation. This is
not a meaningful defence of the British people, nor the
people of Beirut, or Paris, or Mosul, or Raqqa.
One Middle Eastern ambassador with a
medical background put it this way: “You must diagnose a
sickness properly before you can treat it – and you must
treat the root cause. Palliative therapy does not result
in a cure.”
Isil is a combination of a heady theo-fascist
ideology colliding with the hard reality of Sunni
discontent. It is Syrian Sunnis and Iraqi Sunnis who
make up most of what we think of as Isil in those Shia-run
countries. The main effort should be towards separating
these populations from Isil; additional bombers are a
bit further down the “to-do” list.
For over 100 years our friends in
Saudi Arabia have been narrowing Islam by spending
gazillions of petrodollars exporting the teachings of
Muhammad al-Wahhab. Partly as a result, huge populations
now live under Isil's even harsher implementation of
that teaching – many getting on with life with their
heads down, but fearful of the alternatives.
For example, I asked one Western
diplomat what percentage of the population of the Iraqi
town of Mosul might want to be liberated from Isil, she
answered that her best guess was only around 20 per
cent. There is great fear of
the Iranian-backed Shia militias inflicting punishment
on the populations of Sunni areas once Isil has been
driven out.
Someone very senior in the coalition’s
war effort told us: “we have a military campaign, we
don’t have a political one”. At every turn the Baghdad
government thwarts efforts to build political structures
that can secure Sunni areas once Isil are driven out.
Meanwhile, although the Vienna talks
are a start, the international community
remains hopelessly conflicted in our attitude to the
Assad regime (the process of deciding which
opposition groups are terrorists and which are not will
be interesting to watch).
Every player now wants to destroy Isil,
but they won’t give up on their conflicting interests to
do so. The West wants to avoid deploying ground troops
but is hung up on dismantling of the regime in Damascus
– the only player on the ground with a credible if
brutal presence on the ground.
Russia is working hard to keep to keep
the regime in power (in time, probably without the Assad
brothers, by whom they must feel let down) and to keep
their influence and Tartus base.
The Turks are terrified that when the
music finally stops 25 per cent of their territory will
be in a de facto Kurdistan; they are furious with the
Assad regime for not heeding their call to reform,
understandably terrified of the appeal and threat posed
by Isil in their cities, and all the while Ankara bombs
the Kurdish groups that the US is busy arming.
The Iranians on the other hand have to
keep the regime in power to maintain a link to Hizbollah
in Lebanon, and are keen to avoid the emergence of
strong Sunni states on their doorstep – so work
tirelessly to strengthen their fellow Shias in Damascus
and Baghdad.
The Saudis want to stay in power and
are probably now beginning to see that their century-old
export of Wahhabism is an existential threat to the
survival of the House of Saud. Meanwhile ordinary people
will continue to suffer in Isil territory and in what
Isil call “crusader” countries.
And into this rather crowded situation
the UK wants to deploy a few more fast jets
in support of 70,000 phantom "moderates" and what it
refers to as a "comprehensive approach".
It's not good enough. War planes are
indeed part of the mix. But the immediate battlespace is
the Sunni population of Iraq and Syria, and if we are
not addressing that another Brimstone missile is futile.
If we really want to help, we should
be using the influence we think we don’t have. We should
be using it to communicate the message in every possible
corridor that the US, Russia, Turkey, Iran and Saudi
need to decide that they are serious about a cure – and
that if they continue to apply palliative care in their
own interests it will result in the sickness getting a
lot worse.
Adam Holloway is a former Army officer and war
correspondent who now serves as Conservative MP for
Gravesham.