Monday 30 November 2015

Syria, a moment of truth - for Britain

Diane Abbot, a British MP and opposition Cabinet member for Overseas Development was interviewed on the leading radio news programme, Today programme (30 November) following a weekend of massive anti-war protest across the UK.

Abbot pointed out that British attitudes towards PM Cameron's plan to join the bombing in Syria, were moving fast towards a resounding 'No'. The 'Independent' newspaper reported a nearly 60% majority against bombing after polling on 28 November.

But the key question for the interviewer was whether or not Labour leader Corbyn would put the 'whip' on his fellow Labour MPs to vote against the Tory government on this issue. Some Labour MPs, including John McDonnell, the shadow Chancellor and a Corbyn supporter, have called for the vote to be 'a matter of conscience.' But what the interviewer really wanted to do was to open up - again - the splits between the bulk of Labour MPs and the Corbyn leadership. That has been the issue of the hour for the last three weeks in the British political media. What she got was a rebuttal of the priorities implied by her question in favour of a different priority. Abbot firmly suggested that what was involved here was a decision that would have immediate and deadly consequences for some and that added more obstacles to any chance of peace. Abbot continued to underline the necessity to stop the war-mongering. If 'whipping' the Labour MPs to vote no meant that Cameron would withdraw his proposal (he requires a big majority after his spectacular failure 2 years ago, when he wanted to bomb somebody else in Syria) then if leader Corbyn decided to whip she felt stopping more war was the priority, that it was the best thing that the UK could do to end the war - and therefore much more important than any other consideration.

Corbyn has emailed Labour's new membership to check their views. His novel approach breaks entirely with the history of British war mongering. In the past, including in the case of two world wars, the British establishment have started their wars by the decision of the smallest possible clique of the 'great men', and they were all men, who believed that they ran the country. Part of their scheming included how best to engineer popular support. War was always too important to leave to the public. The issue today, the moment of truth for Britain's future as a country, is whether that legacy is overturned; whether a new branch of Britain's war and its deadly effects can be stopped by the decision of its people.

Blair started this avalanche with his foul war in Iraq. He and his successors had to agree, after the stench of the lies and the deaths had settled, that the MPs would have a vote on future wars. (It is astonishing that this simple act was never previously considered necessary!) Today, Labour leader Corbyn can take a further step in elementary democracy. His party will overwhelmingly oppose Cameron's bombing. And so should his MPs. This is an important test. Whether Labour represents its base, its supporters (and now the majority of the population) or whether a collection of individual MPs represent their establishment consciences. Firm action, like Abbot's firm words this morning, based on the real priorities, will have the greatest chance of success both against the bombing, and also against the coming internal rebellion by some Labour MPs.

No comments:

Post a Comment