Syria

Statement

The following Statement was made in the House of Commons on Monday 9 December.

“With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a Statement on Syria. Over less than a fortnight there has been an extraordinary change. What began as an opposition offensive in north-western Syria quickly became a headlong retreat by pro-Assad forces and, over the weekend, the fall of his murderous regime. On 30 November, the regime withdrew from Aleppo; on 5 December, Hama; on 6 December, Daraa and Homs; and on 7 December, Damascus.

As this Government came into office, some in the international community and some in this House asked whether we would re-engage with Assad. His Russian and Iranian allies have long championed him, last year he returned to the Arab League, and increasingly other Governments were also starting to step up their presence in Damascus. This Government chose not to re-engage. We said no because Assad is a monster. We said no because Assad was a dictator whose sole interest was his wealth and his power. We said no because Assad is a criminal who defied all laws and norms to use chemical weapons against the Syrian people. We said no because Assad is a butcher with the blood of countless innocents on his hands. We said no because Assad was a drug dealer, funding his regime through Captagon and illicit finance, and we said no because he was never, ever going to change.

There were those who used to call Assad ‘the lion of Damascus’. Now we see the reality: Assad is the rat of Damascus, fleeing to Moscow with his tail between his legs. How fitting he should end up there. We see streets of Syrians cheering his demise, tearing down his statues and reuniting with loved ones who had been disappeared. We have long hoped to see him gone and welcome the opportunity this brings for the people of Syria.

Assad’s demise is not just a humiliation for him and his henchmen; it is a humiliation for Russia and Iran. Iran’s so-called axis of resistance is crumbling before our eyes and all Vladimir Putin has got from his attempt to prop up Assad for more than a decade is a fallen dictator filing for asylum in Moscow. He says he wants to return Russia to its imperial glory, but after more than 1,000 days he has not subjugated Ukraine. Putin’s fake empire stops short just a few miles outside Donetsk. I have no fear of it, only disgust.

Of course, our revulsion at Assad, his henchmen and those who propped him up must not blind us to the risks of this moment. Assad’s demise brings no guarantee of peace. This is a moment of danger as well as opportunity for Syrians and for the region. The humanitarian situation in Syria is dire, with almost 17 million people in need. Millions are refugees still, largely in neighbouring Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. Seeing so many start to return to Syria is a positive sign of their hopes for a better future now that Assad is gone, but a lot depends on what happens now. This flow into Syria could quickly become a flow back out, which would potentially increase the numbers using dangerous, illegal migration routes to continental Europe and the United Kingdom.

Syria has proven to be a hotbed of extremism. The House will know that the group whose offensive first pushed back the regime, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham—or HTS, as it is now being called—is a proscribed terrorist organisation in the UK as an alias of al-Qaeda. That should rightly make us cautious. Thus far, HTS has offered reassurances to minorities in Aleppo, Hama and Damascus. It has also committed to co-operating with the international community over monitoring chemical weapons. We will judge HTS by its actions, monitoring closely how it and other parties to this conflict treat all civilians in areas they control.

The UK and our allies have spent over a decade combating terrorism in Syria. Daesh remains one of the most significant terrorist threats to the UK, our allies and our interests overseas. We take seriously our duty as a Government to protect the public from this and other terrorist threats.

Amid this uncertainty, the Government have three priorities, first and foremost of which is protecting all civilians, including, of course, minorities. For more than a decade, Syria has been racked by terrible sectarian violence. We continue to do what we can to provide humanitarian support wherever we can. The UK has spent over £4 billion on the Syrian crisis to date. UK-funded mobile medical units already provide emergency services across northern Syria. Last week, we gave a further £300,000 to the White Helmets and today the Prime Minister has announced an additional £11 million of humanitarian support for Syrians.

The second priority is securing an inclusive, negotiated political settlement, as I discussed with the UN special envoy for Syria, Geir Pedersen, yesterday. This is how the Syrian people can begin to chart a path to a united and peaceful Syria.

The final priority is preventing escalation into the wider region. For more than a year, the Middle East has been in the grip of a series of interlocking conflicts, which threatened to become an even more catastrophic war; and in Syria itself, Russia and Iran have kept Assad’s regime on life support. If we are to achieve a better future for Syrians, we should let Syrians themselves determine their future.

We must learn another lesson from this crisis, too. Illicit finance was a fundamental part of Assad’s playbook, and it is part of Putin’s playbook and the playbook of dictators and criminals around the world. This hurts ordinary people in our own country and people in Syria. It drives up crime and drives up house prices here in the UK. That is why today I am announcing £36 million in new funding for the National Crime Agency on anti-corruption, a new anti-corruption champion in Margaret Hodge and new sanctions on those using the illicit gold trade. Previous Governments have neglected that fight; for this Government, it is a mission-critical issue.

With events moving so quickly, the Government have been taking every available opportunity to underline our priorities. Today, my right honourable and learned friend the Prime Minister is in the region visiting the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Over the weekend, I have discussed the situation with my Turkish, Israeli, Emirati and Jordanian counterparts, as well as the UN envoy. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my honourable friend the Member for Lincoln, Mr Falconer, has also just come back from the region, having attended the Doha Forum and the Manama Dialogue. Whatever the coming days bring, I reassure the House that our intense diplomatic engagement will continue.

Assad’s victims can be found all over the world. Many have found sanctuary here in the UK over the years, including film-maker Waad al-Kateab. As she said,

‘we have hope to get our country back’.

The UK stands by Syrians like Waad and by Assad’s victims across the world. In the face of uncertainty and new dangers, we will secure the UK against terrorism and illegal migration, while helping Syrians to achieve a better future. I commend this Statement to the House.”

17:11:00

My Lords, I thank the Minister for producing the Statement for this House. The previous Conservative Government had called for Assad to go over 10 years ago. There are moments in history when moral clarity is essential and, in refusing to re-engage with a dictator who has brought untold suffering to his own people, this Government made the right choice. We believe that Britain must stand firm against tyranny and in support of freedom, democracy, and the dignity and rights of the individual. The fall of Assad is a moment of profound change, not just for Syria but for the whole region. The announcement of additional funding for humanitarian aid, including support for the White Helmets, underscores this Government’s commitment to the Syrian people, and I welcome it. I will follow up on a couple of questions that were asked by my right honourable friend the shadow Foreign Secretary in the other place. First, as we have seen, Assad has fled to Russia and claimed asylum. Can the Minister confirm that no asylum claims will be accepted in this country from former members of the Assad regime, many of whom will be associated with human rights abuses? Secondly, there are concerns about the status of minority faith and ethnic groups under the new regime. Syria is a rich tapestry of faith groups and ethnic groups, and we must ensure that Druze, Alawites, Christians, Kurds and other minority groups must be protected. The Minister’s ministerial colleague the Member of Parliament for Lincoln had conversations with civil society representatives yesterday. Can the Minister update us on which parties these talks were with? Can he also tell the House what assurances the Government are making to these minority groups? Finally, I am sure that many Syrians will be delighted to return to their country, now that Assad is no longer in charge. On the issue of Syrian resettlement, the Foreign Secretary said that the issue was “premature”. Can the Minister expand on what his right honourable friend meant by that?

My Lords, like the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, I welcome the Minister coming to this House to repeat the Statement on Syria. In the past two weeks the changes in Syria have been momentous, and even in the three days since the Statement was given in the other place a lot has happened. As my honourable friend Calum Miller said in the other place, the fall of the Assad regime is momentous for millions of Syrians who have suffered under his brutal rule. The al-Assad dynasty was a family of despots who used chemical weapons against their own people, so its fall is clearly welcome, but there is now potentially a period of great uncertainty and there are a lot of questions for Syria, for the Middle East as a region and for British foreign policy. As the noble Earl pointed out, the previous Government and His Majesty’s current Government have not had diplomatic relations with Damascus for some time. What are His Majesty’s Government now thinking about beginning to at least have some conversations with Damascus, if not diplomatic relations? We are in a period of flux where it is entirely appropriate for the people of Syria to determine their own future, but there will be consequences for British foreign policy, as the Foreign Secretary said in his Statement, both for the situation in the Middle East and the potential flow of people out of Syria. Are there proposals for some behind-the-scenes conversations with people on the ground in Syria? Also, what conversations are His Majesty’s Government having with our partners in Turkey, or Türkiye? Because clearly there is significant involvement of the Government of Türkiye in Syria with their concern about the Kurds. That raises a lot of questions about relations between Syria and the wider region that it would be important to understand. There are clearly short-term concerns about instability and minority rights, which we obviously need to stand behind, because although the groups that have toppled the Assad regime have so far said that they are going to look after the minorities, do His Majesty’s Government think that is the case and what support are they hoping to give to minorities in Syria? There is also an immediate question about aid. Clearly, the £11 million that has just been given to Syria, announced by the Foreign Secretary on Monday, is welcome, but the Foreign Secretary said in his Statement that there are 17 million Syrians in humanitarian need. The quantum that has been given is £11 million; that is about 67 pence per person in need. It does not sound the most generous of offers. Given that we have seen cuts to ODA over recent years, could the Minister tell the House whether there is the opportunity for further funding to go to Syria? At the moment the aid seems to be de minimis. In the medium to longer term the people of Syria will clearly want justice and it is vital that Assad and his closest allies face justice but, having claimed asylum in Russia, it is quite difficult to see how that can be brought about. Have His Majesty’s Government thought about ways in which those who have perpetrated the worst atrocities in Syria might be brought to justice? What support are His Majesty’s Government planning to offer to assist Syrians in rebuilding and revitalising their own institutions, ideally helping them pave the way to democracy? As I said earlier, this must obviously be done according to their own preferences, because what we clearly should not be doing at this time is saying that we have a blueprint for what people in Syria should be doing. It needs to be led by the Syrians but, as supporters of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, presumably His Majesty’s Government wish to support those in Syria who want to rebuild relations in an appropriate way.

I thank both noble Lords for their questions. I start by making the following correction to my intervention to this House last week, during questions on a Statement on Syria. In response to questions from the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, and the noble Lord, Lord Dodds, I stated: “We gave an additional £4 million to the United Nations in October”.—[Official Report, 3/12/24; col. 1108.] I would like to correct the record to reflect that we gave an additional £3 million funding on 23 October to humanitarian partners providing life-saving emergency assistance and healthcare to the most vulnerable people fleeing from the Lebanon conflict into Syria and the communities that host them. Of the £3 million in funding, £2 million had been allocated to the UN OCHA-led Syria Humanitarian Fund, with £500,000 given to both the International Medical Corps UK and the UNFPA. I also point out that, as both noble Lords said, these events in Syria are extraordinary. We are monitoring them very closely and are co-ordinating with our international partners and our many Syrian contacts. We reiterate the importance of protecting civilians, including minorities, as the noble Baroness said, and of moving quickly to an inclusive political transition. As the UN Secretary-General said: “The future of Syria is a matter for Syrians to determine”. Assad, with support from Russia and Iran, has committed brutal atrocities against his own people for the last 13 years. As the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, said, both the Opposition and the Government made it very clear that we would not tolerate that. The Syrian people suffered too long under his cruel tyranny, and they deserve a brighter future. We have been at the forefront of the response to this fast-moving situation, speaking regularly to regional and other partners about the situation. As the Foreign Secretary said, he has spoken to the UN Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria and a number of regional counterparts, and my honourable friend Hamish Falconer, the Minister for the Middle East, has also discussed developments in Syria with regional partners and Syrian civil society actors. I am unable to give specific details about that because obviously these circumstances are changing quickly, but the UK special representative for Syria continues to engage with regional partners, including Turkey, which is a vital component to ensuring that we have a fair transition to democracy. I say to the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, that the vast majority of Syrians were fleeing the Assad regime. We do not know what will replace it at the moment, so there is no way of judging an asylum claim and whether it is safe for someone to return. We will keep all country guidance relating to asylum claims under constant review so that we can respond to emerging issues. The noble Baroness, Lady Smith, is absolutely right: we have seen how, with Russia’s military support, the Assad regime was able to continue its brutal campaign against the Syrian people for 13 years, and that included horrendous crimes. It comes as no surprise that Putin, himself indicted by the ICC for suspected war crimes, has elected to give sanctuary to Assad. The UK has long condemned Iran’s reckless and destabilising activity, which puts at risk the security and prosperity of the region. In terms of accountability and justice, UK-funded partners have played a pivotal role in developing a credible evidence base to record atrocities committed in Syria. We continue to provide extensive support to our UK ISF partners and have committed a total of £1.15 million ODA towards accountability and documentation-related programmes in the financial year 2024-25. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that people are held to account for their crimes. The noble Baroness, Lady Smith, also asked about the humanitarian response. On 9 December, the Prime Minister announced an additional £11 million of humanitarian aid for the Syrian people. That is an additional amount. This has helped the UN and NGOs meet the needs of the most vulnerable across the country, including the more than 1 million people estimated to have been displaced by recent events. Of course, on 6 December, we announced an additional £300,000 in funding to the White Helmets, to which she referred, to facilitate humanitarian access, allow the expansion of its existing ambulance system and enable the safe removal of unexploded weapons. We call on all parties to support humanitarian access, including for humanitarian workers, in all regions of Syria, and we are working closely with humanitarian and other partners to get a fuller picture of the situation, assess the impacts and needs, and determine how best to respond. We are constantly monitoring the situation. I hope that I have covered most of the points that noble Lords have asked about, but of course we have opportunities for Back-Bench questions.

17:26:00

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend the Minister a little more about how this £11 million in extra aid will be spent? He mentioned the use of the UN and other NGOs, but I wonder whether there have been any preliminary contacts with HTS and, if not, when these might take place, to discuss how aid should be distributed but also to try to establish a little more about its intentions and assess whether they are entirely benign, which I hope they will be.

Well, the situation is fast moving, and we are keeping it under constant review. HTS is a proscribed organisation in the United Kingdom, having been added as an alias of al-Qaeda in 2017. I say very clearly that we will judge HTS by its actions and continue to monitor closely how it and other parties to this conflict treat all civilians in areas that it controls. The Government do not routinely comment on whether a group is being considered for proscription or deproscription, but I stress that we are keeping the matter under constant review and will be making judgments based on actions, not just on the original position.

My Lords, although Governments might learn a lot about not establishing red lines in other countries where we then breach them, which we have done with Putin and, particularly, in Syria with chemical weapons, it is clearly too early to know how Russia will respond to this. We know that it has withdrawn some of its naval fleet, but we do not know what the immediate future holds in Putin’s mind. These are early days—I am glad to hear in the Statement that asylum claims have been suspended, as it were, for the time being—but can the Minister give any guarantee that nobody will be returned to Syria before we are clearer about what they might be going back to, especially if they belong to a minority, and that proper hearings will still be held so that justice is done for some very vulnerable people?

Let me make it clear to the right reverend Prelate that the Home Office has temporarily paused decisions on Syrian asylum claims while we assess the current situation. The vast majority were fleeing the Assad regime, but we do not know what will replace it at the moment, so there is no way of judging an asylum claim and whether it is safe for someone to return. That is why we have paused the decisions. We have not stopped the process; applications are being considered. But we will keep all country guidance relating to asylum claims under constant review so that we can respond to emerging issues.

My Lords, I hear what the Minister has said about proscription or de-proscription. However, as someone from a Muslim background who has, alas, too much familiarity with the travails of the Middle East over decades, can I urge the Minister, in making those judgments, to disaggregate between terrorism and Islamism? We know that HTS now proclaims to be Islamist rather than belonging to the terrorist family from which it came, but it is profoundly important in making these judgments to be clear that Syria is not going to turn into a secular liberal democracy overnight—it would be the first Muslim country in the Middle East to do so if it did—but will require engagement in the longer term. That engagement must be based not on religious grounds but on clear security grounds.

The important thing to stress, as I said earlier, reflecting the Secretary-General’s comments, is that it is for the Syrians to determine their own Government. Turning to HTS, it is important to repeat that we will judge HTS by its actions and continue to monitor closely how it and other parties in this conflict treat all civilians in all areas under their control. As the US special envoy said, we want an inclusive transition process and that is something that we will be monitoring extremely closely.

My Lords, what assessment has been made of the threat that those being kept in the al-Hawl camp in northern Syria might present to the United Kingdom were the camp is to be disbanded? What consideration has been given to discussions with the new authorities and with our allies about the future of that camp?

To be honest, I have not got a specific answer on that. In terms of speaking to all our allies, we are looking to ensure the protection of all civilians in all parts of Syria. I will inquire in more detail about the current situation and return to the noble Baroness.

My Lords, given that we no longer have an embassy in Damascus—although I feel sure that British embassies in neighbouring countries are being very helpful in this present situation—the main voice and the main channel of communication is the BBC and other brave journalists. Can the Minister comment on the role of the BBC and the relationship that the Government are trying to build on that base?

We have had many debates in this House about the role of the BBC, and in particular the World Service. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that it can continue to function. The important thing about the BBC is its independence. It is a reliable voice. It is not for me to comment on it. We must ensure that it is able to continue broadcasting that reliable and truthful voice. All our actions in Syria are through NGOs and other civilian groups. We will continue to support them in humanitarian ways and in other ways; it is an inclusive process that we want to ensure for the future of Syria.

I thank the Minister for the Statement. Among regional partners, he identified Turkey. What exchanges are taking place with the US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, who is involved in going to Turkey to discuss in Ankara the clashes between US forces in northern Syria and Turkish-backed rebels?

Both the Foreign Secretary and Minister Falconer have been trying to ensure the de-escalation of any potential conflicts. We want to see a process of transition that is inclusive. That is what Secretary of State Blinken is ensuring, that is what his discussions are doing and that is what Minister Falconer is trying to do. We are in a very fast-changing situation, but it needs calm heads to stay above it.

My Lords, I welcome the tone of the Minister’s Statement in another place and of the Front-Bench spokesman today. I do not envy him the decisions that are coming in the next few days. Will the Minister assure us that, if things go wrong, and HTS turns out to be not as friendly as their first statements appear, we will be ready to pivot to look after that community? A third of the population of Old Damascus is Christian, and there will be Alawites and other Sunnis. It will need real resource from the Government to respond quickly to what might be a completely new challenge. I hope not, but they need to be prepared.

I do not want to be repetitive, but we are monitoring the situation and keeping it under review. We are judging HTS by its actions, and so far we are hopeful for a positive, inclusive, peaceful transition. Reflecting the point of view of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, all our efforts over the last 14 years have been to support civilian groups and we will continue to do that. Protection of civilians is a vital part of our strategy on Syria.

My Lords, like the noble Baroness, Lady Lawlor, I am addressing events particularly in the north-east of Syria. There are reliable reports coming out that Turkish-backed militias known as the Syrian National Army are attacking the Syrian Democratic Forces across the region in central Syria and in the north-east autonomous self-governing region known as Rojava. There are reliable reports of Turkish aircraft and drones hitting Kobani and the capital, Qamishli. Does that reflect the Minister’s understanding of what is happening there? Has he seen some of the horrendous social media footage that is emerging from that area? What are the Government doing in diplomatic and humanitarian terms to address this situation? I should, perhaps for transparency, declare that I met with representatives from Rojava in Ankara in 2016.

I have not seen social media, but I think that the important thing is that we act based on the evidence presented to us. We have been focused, in terms of north-east Syria, on the battle against Daesh, and we will continue to focus on protecting the safety and security of all UK citizens, particularly in that area. As the present situation unfolds in Syria, we are working closely with all partners to monitor the threat, as part of the global coalition against Daesh and other terrorist threats. I do not want to go into any more specific details except to keep repeating that we are working closely with all allies to focus on what needs to be an inclusive transition. At the moment, we are continuing to judge HTS on its actions and not simply on what others are saying.

My Lords, approximately five years ago the media made us aware that there are children who are British citizens by descent in north-eastern Syria. It took a while, after meeting with Government Ministers, for their families—their relatives here—to realise that the appropriate jurisdiction was to make them wards under the family court. Decisions were made about whether to bring them to the UK. It is reported today that about 65 British-linked people have already been identified. Can His Majesty’s Government ensure that those who went out there as older teenagers or as adults are not grouped together with children who were born and raised out there but who are British citizens by descent? Their families here need to know they exist in order to exercise the jurisdiction of the High Court here so that decisions can be made about whether they come here. Are His Majesty’s Government making sure that those children are identified, if they are out there?

I repeat the point that I made: it is a focus of our activity, particularly in north-east Syria. The safety and security of the UK and its citizens remain a top priority for the Government. We will do whatever we can to protect UK citizens, but I will not go into the details about how that is achieved. I do not think it would be appropriate at this stage.

My Lords, I am very glad that His Majesty’s Government have already given £11 million towards humanitarian aid. That is such good news. Secondly, our watchword surely should be that old adage: loose lips sink ships. We have to be extremely careful what we say. The material at the moment is very delicate. I encourage the Minister not only to judge and watch what the new Government are doing but to find ways of communicating a slightly more positive view of engagement. Somehow, in a very clever way, we have to become participants. Finally, we all are concerned about biological and chemical weapons. What steps are His Majesty’s Government taking, together with all our partners, to work hard with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the convention? If those weapons get into the wrong hands, or the new Government think, “We’d better keep them, in order that we may use them”, that would be pretty dangerous. What steps will the Government take to make sure this is handled delicately and quickly?

The best thing I can do is reflect the noble and right reverend Lord’s sentiments. We need to respond to the actions rather than simply what people have said before. We want to ensure that we focus all our diplomatic efforts in relation to all regional and other partners. We are working through the UN special envoy to ensure that we do so. Also, Minister Falconer is speaking to civil society actors within Syria. The security risks are very clear, but we need to ensure that we react with caution and sensitivity to focus on how we can support the genuine calls for an inclusive transfer. The last 13 years have shown the horrors of what a dictator can do. We now need to focus on supporting the Syrian people in determining their own future. The films that I have seen certainly reflect the jubilation of some people being released from those horrendous prisons. We should understand that.

What is the Government’s view of the recent Israeli military actions in Syria?

Well, Israel has said that its presence in the buffer zone is defensive, limited and temporary, in response to the evolving security situation in Syria. As we have witnessed over the past year, Israel has legitimate security threats across its northern borders. Nevertheless, I will be clear that Israel’s presence in the buffer zone must not become permanent and I condemn the statements from some Israeli politicians who have already called for that. Israel has said that it remains committed to the principles of the 1974 separation of forces agreement and is committed to supporting the UNDOF peacekeeping force. The UK expects Israel to adhere to these commitments and I will hold it to them.

My Lords, it was a bittersweet moment for me when we heard about the fall of President Assad, because my great friend Marie Colvin was a brave and brilliant journalist in Homs whom we now think was targeted by him. Picking up on what my noble friend Lady Hooper—if I may call her that—said, and given everything that has been said, it is important that our journalists, particularly from the BBC, are able to report what is going on there. So can we please confirm support for the BBC World Service, in particular its Arabic service?

I think the noble Baroness knows my support for the BBC, including the World Service and its activity, and certainly she is absolutely right to draw attention to Marie’s outrageous death. I have been very keen to work with our allies to focus on media freedom. We are part of the Media Freedom Coalition, working with allies such as Canada. We are determined to ensure that the authentic free voice is heard, and we will do everything we can to ensure that the World Service is able to fulfil its functions in that regard.

House adjourned at 5.47 pm.