Willie Rennie has written for The National, Scotland’s independence supporting newspaper about why Liberal Democrat MPs are supporting airstrikes in Syria. That view is not likely to find many supporters amongst the National’s readers.
We agree with those who say further diplomatic progress is needed. It is vital the UK Government uses all efforts to support the Vienna peace talks and any military action by the UK must be part of an international effort involving all those who have an interest in defeating Daesh.
What we have seen in recent months is the emergence of a more coherent international approach towards a diplomatic solution in Syria that involves countries such as Iran and Russia for the first time. The last time the House of Commons voted on intervention in Syria in 2013, this was not the case. There are no easy answers on any question relating to whether UK forces should take part in military action.
I know that there are people on both sides of the debate with sincerely held beliefs. But just because the Labour government got it badly wrong in Iraq doesn’t mean that we should rule out any action at any time in any country. We saw that in Kosovo.
Ultimately, we face a situation where we have to judge whether the costs of inaction outweigh those of playing a role in international efforts to defeat Daesh in Syria. We believe that as a country we should play our part in helping solve the deep-seated problems in that part of the world.
You can read the whole article here.
* Newshound: bringing you the best Lib Dem commentary in print, on air or online.



12 Comments
I imagine that most of our remaining supporters in Scotland will now be voting SNP. So much for the fight back!
The poll of Liberal Democrat members on Lib-Dem voice showed a clear majority against supporting the Government motion to extend air strikes to Syria.
Why those Lib-Dem members who oppose air strikes should have to sit back and watch their views be supported by SNP, Labour and some Conservative MP leaves me speechless.
‘What we have seen in recent months is the emergence of a more coherent international approach towards a diplomatic solution in Syria that involves countries such as Iran and Russia for the first time.’
Really? This looks like a case-study in the failure of diplomacy. On balance I’m against UK action, but let’s not kid ourselves that there’s a solution on the diplomatic horizon.
John, for sure, I wish we were opposing this, but Tim Farron’s speech has been one of the best, most confident and compassionate of the debate.
Caron that is exactly right.
@ Caron Lindsay “Tim Farron’s speech has been one of the best, most confident and compassionate of the debate”. – just not a patch on that of Alex Salmon.
@ Caron Very sadly, because I’ve known Tim for a long time and have a great respect and affection for him, I have to say it’s not what people say it’s what people do.
If don’t soon start to stake out some principled positions then what prospects for the #fightback?
If our Party had a claim to anything distinctive in terms of policy it was our opposition to Trident and our opposition to fruitless military escapades in the Middle East. The first was trashed by our conference in September and the second is being trashed by our MPs tonight.
Ian:
“fruitless military escapades in the Middle East”
So are you against the air action in Iraq? Which (in association with allies, the Iraqi government, the Kurds) has certainly been effective.
Our enemy’s friend is our arms customer! For me, that’s too muddy a situation to get involved in militarily. One can only hope that if default anti-Isil allies (like Assad) use gas on opponents then we will withdraw immediately.
So do we take a position where ISIS can have a free hand to murder Christians and the wrong sort of Muslims, and they are not open to negotions, or we do take actions having decided which action will minimise the civilian deaths, whatever that is.
Willie has just lost Alex Cole-Hamilton an activist. This is not the first incredibly misguided statement he has made.