Syria

British Foreign Secretary Says Diplomacy Has Failed in Syria

|

Credit:Chatham House/wikimedia

British Foreign Secretary William Hague has said that diplomatic pressure on Syria has failed at that the U.K. is considering responding to the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria, adding that the U.K. and its allies could intervene without the United Nation's approval. Russia, one of Assad's strongest allies, has warned Western nations that intervention without a U.N. mandate violates international law. 

From the BBC:

Diplomatic pressure on Syria has failed and the UK is considering its response to a suspected chemical attack, Foreign Secretary William Hague says.

He told the BBC it would be possible for the UK and its allies to respond without the UN's unanimous backing.

In Syria, snipers fired at a convoy of UN inspectors heading to the site of the suspected attack, the UN said.

The PM is cutting his holiday short and is expected to hold a National Security Council meeting on Wednesday.

Downing Street said a decision on whether to recall Parliament would be made on Tuesday.

Last week Hague preempted any official confirmation that chemical weapons were used in Syria, saying that he believed that the recent massacre was conducted by Syrian forces and involved the use of chemical weapons. 

Over the weekend British Prime Minister David Cameron and President Obama released a joint statement threatening a "serious response" is it is confirmed that chemical weapons were recently used in Syria. 

NEXT: The Obamacare Lobbying Bonanza

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. British Foreign Secretary William Hague has said that diplomatic pressure on Syria has failed at that the U.K. is considering responding to the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria, adding that the U.K. and its allies could intervene without the United Nation’s approval

    And he’s willing to use the full force of the US military to back those words up!

    1. Now now. He would commit British troops but the last 10 that haven’t been RIFed are on vacation at DisneyWorld.

      So screw that!

      1. If he was smart, he might be able to thin out some of the Muslim controlled neighborhoods in London by getting them all fired up to go support their bros in Syria.

        1. “In order to show our opposition to the Assad regime and facilitate the entirely understandable ambitions of the more theocratically inclined residents of the UK, the government will be providing one-way tickets to Syria for anyone interested in registering their displeasure with Assad in person.”

    2. Let’s you and him fight.

  2. I’ve been all around the web, and I have yet to find any support for this latest in a long line of stupid interventionist follies by the US.

    Even at FluffPo, there is close to 0 support for this. All I see is 2 different sides of the same post:

    ‘Booosh started all of this, we need to stay out!’

    and

    ‘But your boy Obama continues it! We need to stay out!’

    That’s pretty much it. No public support for this, and the Obama admin is not even looking for it.

    Hillary is the next war monger in line, the wars shall continue unabated, with or without public support.

    1. But its for democracy and freedom. We must support the Syrian rebels who are not elected, against the Syrian government who are not elected by fighting a war which is not supported by the American people. If we don’t fight then we will lose the respect of the dictatorships in Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States who support the Islamic rebels.

      Or at least this is what my TV is telling me?????

      1. Your TEEVEE must be broken.

        Try a Curtis Mathis – it’s made in the USA?!

        Oh, wait…never mind…

        /way back machine

    2. You just know that Shrieking Idiot is probably furiously massaging his raging warboner right now as we speak. But yeah, other than him, not much support for it out there at all.

  3. British Foreign Secretary Says Diplomacy Has Failed in Syria

    War is just diplomacy by other means.

    /snark

  4. Get someone else to dislodge them. Can’t Turkey take care of that? No sense getting ourselves involved; Syria isn’t even a supply center, for crap’s sake!

  5. British Foreign Secretary Says Diplomacy Has Failed in Syria

    Wars have started that way!

    No, really.

  6. Diplomatic pressure on Syria has failed and the UK is considering its response to a suspected chemical attack, Foreign Secretary William Hague says.

    I can’t wait for Foreign Secretary William Hague to eat his words when the U.N. finds no evidence of poisonous gas being used by the Syrian government against civilians!

    — Ahem… Iraq —

    Hmm… I guess I will have to wait sitting down…

  7. Roll that beautiful bean footage. Wow.

    http://www.AnonRights.tk

  8. I’m hearing the latest rationale is “if we don’t do something about this, Al Quaeda will get the poison gas and use it on (u.s., Israel)

    1. Well, we do know that teh Jooos are susceptible to gas…

      WHAT??

      1. Am I a bad person for laughing at that?

        1. I’m a worse person for writing it, but I couldn’t help myself. I’m incorrigible.

  9. British Foreign Secretary Says Diplomacy Has Failed in Syria

    I meant to post, “No SHIT, Sherlock” earlier.

    Now I have. Carry on.

    1. “Diplomacy has failed in Syria. Sadly, the Syrian government has not taken any aggressive action against the UK, so much as we want to blow some shit up real good in Syria, we really just don’t have the grounds to do so. Good luck out there, jihadis!”

  10. Assad doesn’t plan on using the weapons on us, so why the hell would we get involved?

  11. Our old pal joe was always full of reasons why “responsibility to protect” was a fierce moral imperative in Libya, but just didn’t apply in Syria. I’m kinda wishing he still hung with us, so we could hear all about how allofasudden we now have an RTP mission in Syria.

    1. Because the totality of circs have changed. Duh.

  12. is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just excited about going to war, lol

    Icantwaittoblowstuffup.com

  13. Correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t Syria more or less ignored all attempts at diplomacy that weren’t obviously to its advantage since roughly the mid 1970’s? In the 19th century, the Western nations would have gotten sick of Syria pissing in the pot sometime in the first decade, and the Syrians would now be learning English, French, or possibly German. I’m not asserting that that would be a good outcome, mind, but since we seem to be heading there anyway I do feel the urge to ask why it took so goddamned long.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.