Britain’s military gains against the Islamic State terrorist group could be undermined by failures of political progress, according to a group of MPs.
Advertisement
Asked about difference between United Kingdom air action in Syria and Iraq, Lieutenant General Mark Carleton-Smith, Deputy Chief of Defence Staff (Military Strategy and Operations) said that in Syria the United Kingdom was “marginally engaged, from the air only, across a much less homogenous battlefield, where the identification of the multifaceted parties, agencies and militias is much more hard to determine”.
Responding to the report, a Government spokesman said Britain was “at the forefront” of efforts to defeat IS in Iraq and Syria.
But a report released today by the House of Commons Defence Committee has criticised the government’s overall strategy in the region, questioning whether it is sufficiently flexible to account for the changing nature of the Middle Eastern conflict.
Lawmakers warned that while substantial progress was being made in Iraq, the situation in Syria is “much less certain”.
The U.K. government’s case for extending its air campaign against Islamic State to Syria from Iraq late past year was based on a strategy of supporting what then-Prime Minister David Cameron said were 70,000 moderate opposition forces.
But while there was evidence of this happening in Iraq, the air operations in Syria were being held back by “a lack of partners on the ground” who could capitalise on them, said the committee. “We believe this is partly due to the aspirations of the UK Government in respect of each country”. It warned that the Islamist group, like al-Qaeda before it, could transform into an worldwide movement if squeezed out of Raqqa in Syria and Mosul in Iraq. “These goals can not be accomplished by military means alone”.
The report detailed 550 airstrikes since December 2015 by British forces in Iraq, where it said coalition military effort was “bearing fruit”.
The report has said the disparity between military effort and that on stabilization was “concerning” and urged the British government to set out exactly “how it intends to help ensure that political reform is achieved and what action it is planning to take to keep it in step with the military campaign”.
Advertisement
“As a result, Daesh is losing territory in Iraq and Syria”. Daesh can’t be defeated by military means alone, which is why our strategy tackles its finances, propaganda, flow of foreign fighters and evolving terrorist threat.
