Proceeding contribution from John Baron (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 29 August 2013. It occurred during Debate on Syria and the Use of Chemical Weapons.
Syria and the Use of Chemical Weapons
The JIC document states clearly that it cannot understand the “precise motivation”. The document is in terms of probability. I put this question to the House, and particularly to those who want to intervene militarily: what is the harm in waiting for the UN inspectors to come back and present their evidence? We should not forget that the west did its utmost to get those weapons inspectors to the site. At the very least we can wait a couple of days to see what they say after their due inspections. Otherwise, what was the logic of sending them there in the first place? Sending them there and not waiting for the report would not make sense.
The second question is of legitimacy. Is military intervention without a UN resolution legitimate?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 566 c1496
- Session
- 2013-14
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Chemical weapons Crimes against humanity Inspections International cooperation Legal opinion International law Politics and government Refugees Weapons War crimes USA Syria Military intervention UN Security Council Joint Intelligence Committee Responsibility to protect
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2022-08-30 19:27:16 +0100
- URI
- http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-08-29/13082919000009
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-08-29/13082919000009
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-08-29/13082919000009