Miliband Affirms No Regret Over Blocking 2013 UK Military Action Against Assad

Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has stated he does not regret his vote in 2013 to prevent UK military intervention against Bashar al-Assad, who was then the Syrian President. At the time, Prime Minister David Cameron intended to attack Syria, following reports that Assad had deployed chemical weapons against his own citizens. However, Mr. Miliband, then the leader of the Labour Party, instructed his Members of Parliament to vote against the proposal, thereby preventing the UK from participating in any action. He was compelled to address the issue after his cabinet colleague, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, questioned that decision. Mr. Streeting later denied having criticized Mr. Miliband. Appearing on the BBC’s Question Time on Thursday, the health secretary, who was not an MP at the time, said: “With hindsight, I think we can say looking back on the events of 2013 the hesitation of this country and the US created a vacuum that Russia moved into and kept Assad in power for much longer.” He added: “What we can not say is that the back of Assad is going to lead to a better Syria.” In a post on X on Friday, Mr. Streeting insisted his comments were not aimed at the former Labour leader. “On the contrary, I pointed out the challenges of hindsight, Libya and the uncertainty we face about post-Assad Syria today.” He continued: “It is frustrating, to put it mildly, to see a nuanced answer to a complicated issue presented as criticism of a good colleague,” he said. Asked on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme if he concurred with Mr. Streeting’s Question Time argument, Mr. Miliband responded: “No, I don’t.” He elaborated: “I believe after what happened in Iraq, where hundreds of British troops died and thousands were injured, we could not commit British military forces without a clear plan.” Mr. Miliband further stated: “As to the question about whether it would have led to the end of Assad, the truth is in 2017 and 2018 Donald Trump bombed Assad and it did not lead to the end of Assad.” He concluded: “I welcome the fall of a brutal dictator… but those people who say if only we had taken military action he would have somehow fallen – I just frankly don’t believe it.” When questioned about the differing perspectives between the two ministers, a No 10 spokesman indicated that the government’s priority was “the safety of civilians and the peaceful transfer of power” in Syria. The prime minister’s spokesman added: “Obviously I’m not going to comment on something that alludes to a period pre-this government.” Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey, who voted in favour of military action in 2013, expressed regret that the House of Commons as a whole did not. He remarked: “We were working with President Obama because Assad had used chemical weapons against his own people.” He further stated: “And international law said we should have acted.” Last week, Assad fled to Russia after rebel forces gained control of the Syrian capital, bringing an end to decades of rule by the Assad family. During his governance, Human Rights Watch documented at least 85 chemical weapons attacks in Syria, the majority of which it attributed to the Syrian government – a claim the government has denied. Victims of the chemical attacks have been speaking to the BBC, including Tawfiq Diam, whose wife and four children were killed in 2018. In 2013, Mr. Cameron declared the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons to be “morally indefensible” and sought MPs’ approval for the principle of undertaking military action to deter further use of such weapons. The military action would have involved US-led air strikes rather than a ground invasion. The motion was defeated by 285 votes to 272, with Labour, 30 Conservatives, and nine Liberal Democrats voting against it. Following the vote, Mr. Cameron stated that it was clear Parliament did not wish to take action and that he would “act accordingly.” Although then-US President Barack Obama had stated he would punish any use of chemical weapons by Syria, he did not act, partly due to a lack of support from other allies, including the UK. Conservatives expressed anger at the time, accusing Mr. Miliband of initially promising Mr. Cameron his support but later changing his mind. Reports indicated that Mr. Miliband had been warned that if he backed military action, he could face a rebellion from his own MPs, many of whom were still affected by the Labour government’s involvement in the 2003 invasion of Iraq.