MPs should reconsider air strikes against Isis in Syria – defence secretary

MPs should be given the opportunity to reconsider authorising British air strikes on Islamic State forces in Syria, the defence secretary will tell MPs.

British forces have been carrying out air strikes on the terror group in Iraq since September 2014, but the RAF should expand its aerial bombing to targets in Syria,Michael Fallon will say.

The minister is expected to argue that Isis does not respect borders and that any evidence that last week’s massacre in Tunisia was planned in Syria would demonstrate that the group’s leadership in the country is a direct threat to the British people.

Fallon will make his comments in Thursday’s parliamentary debate on Britain and international security. He is expected to assure MPs that no action will be taken without a Commons vote. It is thought that David Cameron would prefer to wait until a new Labour leader is in place in September before seeking parliamentary approval.

The prime minister was defeated in August 2013 when Ed Miliband effectively blocked military strikes against the regime of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, after a chemical weapons attack near Damascus.

The coalition government won parliament’s support last year for the air strikes against Isis targets in Iraq. But Cameron stopped short of trying to win approval for expanding the air strikes to Syria amid objections from the Labour party.

Fallon told the BBC’s World at One on Wednesday that MPs needed to think carefully about how to defeat an organisation that ignores international borders, describing the UK’s approach as illogical.

“We’ve always been clear that Isil [Isis] has to be defeated in both Syria and Iraq. We have plenty to do in Iraq. Each member of the coalition is doing different things. Isil is organised and directed and administered from Syria. There is an illogicality about not being able to do it.”

Conservative MP Crispin Blunt, the newly appointed chair of the foreign affairs select committee, warned that any action taken should be a “battle winning decision” and that air strikes in Syria would make little difference to the outcome of the mission to defeat Isis. He stressed that the UK’s role in fighting the terrorist group was minor, saying that only 5% of the anti-Isis missions flown in the region were by UK aircraft.

Speaking to the BBC’s Today programme, Blunt said the UK would be getting itself into a legal grey area. “I don’t think it’s quite as clear as people have said it is. It’s easy to come in as the guest of the government in Iraq, at their invitation, in their country. It becomes slightly more questionable when you don’t have a United Nations security council resolution and you’re operating in another country.”

The prime minister is keen to explore whether parliament would support an expansion of the bombing campaign as part of what he describes as his “full spectrum” response to Isis in light of the Tunisia gun attack.

Cameron, who is due to outline his response to extremist threats at home and abroad within weeks, wants to test the waters for a renewed parliamentary vote to permit air strikes on Syria.

In what is being described as a “pitch-rolling” – the buzz phrase for preparing the ground for a change in strategy – the prime minister will see if it is realistic to return to the Commons for a vote in the autumn after the election of a new Labour leader. Cameron will be unable to act without the support of the Labour frontbench because Tory rebels would cut his parliamentary majority on any military action.

Fallon said: “It is a new parliament and MPs will want to think very carefully about how we best deal with Isil [Isis]. [There is an] illogicality [with] Isil [Isis] not respecting the border lines; they don’t differentiate between Syria and Iraq, they’re establishing this evil caliphate across both countries. There is no legal bar to us operating in Syria but we don’t have the parliamentary approval for it.

“We don’t need it at the moment because we are playing our part in the campaign and what we do in Iraq actually frees up the US aircraft to attack in Syria. Isil [Isis] has to be defeated in both countries. Its evil in Iraq is all being directed by its headquarters in Syria.”

Fallon suggested that proof of a direct link between the Tunisian gun attack and Isis would intensify calls for striking targets in Syria. He said: “If we can link it back, [if] it does link directly back to Isil [Isis] in Syria, then we will have to reflect with the rest of the coalition how best we deal with that.”

Speaking to the BBC’s Today programme on Thursday morning, the former head of the British army, Richard Dannatt, said Fallon was right to say that Britain’s current approach was inconsistent.

“So called Islamic State, Isil, Isis, call them what you like, have no respect for the borders that currently exist,” he said. “Iraq is Iraq, Syria is Syria to us, but not to them. Michael Fallon has said they don’t differentiate and frankly it has been illogical for the last year that our forces have been engaged in the air above Iraq and not above Syria.

“There is a practical consideration and I don’t know what the technical answer is. We have been concerned about the Syrian air defence system for quite some time, but it would seem that the Americans and other members of the coalition have successfully been operating in the Syrian air space. If they can, then I believe that we can, too, and if that is not a major issue then we should.”

The prime minister’s spokeswoman said: “The prime minister has been clear on the need for us to be crushing Isil [Isis] in both Iraq and Syria in the sense of the role we are playing alongside others.

“Clearly, Isil [Isis] is seeking to find areas from which it can operate, from which it can seek to threaten people here in Britain. As part of what the PM was talking about, in terms of having a full-spectrum response, that means not just focusing on one area where they are but looking at a whole range of areas and how Isil [Isis] is operating.”