12:13
Tieng Anh Vui
The BBC's Jeremy Bowen: "Many Christian Syrians fled because they anticipated American attacks this weekend"
MPs could be asked to vote again on British military involvement in Syria if new evidence emerges about who was behind the recent suspected chemical weapons attack, Boris Johnson has said.
The Conservative London mayor joined calls for a second vote after MPs defeated the government last week.
Ministers earlier ruled out a further motion, with Foreign Secretary William Hague saying Parliament had "spoken".
The US has delayed strikes pending the approval of Congress next week.
Secretary of State John Kerry now says America has evidence the chemical nerve agent sarin was used in a deadly attack in Damascus last month.
In other developments:
- Arab League foreign ministers urged the world community to "take the deterrent and necessary measures" against Syria. But several members - including Lebanon and Iraq - did not back the call
- Jordan - a key US ally in the region - ruled out joining any US-led coalition against Damascus
- UN experts are analysing samples of evidence gathered in Syria to determine whether chemical weapons attacks have taken place on a number of occasions
- The UK government has rejected newspaper claims chemicals exported from Britain after the uprising in Syria began could have been used in the production of agents such as sarin gas
Mr Johnson said a new proposal "inviting British participation" in military action could be put before UK politicians "if there is new and better evidence" that President Assad's forces were behind the suspected attack which killed hundreds of Syrians.
Some other senior politicians, including former Westminster party leaders Lord Ashdown and Lord Howard - and former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind - have said the US delay could allow the House of Commons to "think again".
It comes after the government sought support in principle for UK involvement but lost by 13 votes after almost 40 MPs from the two coalition parties joined Labour in siding against the motion.
Analysis
Spotting the likely pause before any military action as a result of President Obama consulting Congress, three Westminster big beasts each independently floated an idea.
Two were former Westminster party leaders, Lord Ashdown and Lord Howard.
The third was a former Foreign Secretary and Defence Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who now chairs the Intelligence and Security Committee.
Their basic pitch was this: If the facts change on Syria, could the Commons be asked to change its mind?
But senior figures from both the government and Labour stressed that parliament has spoken.
A second vote, with the leadership in support of military action, could split Labour down the middle.
A second defeat could cost David Cameron his job.
However on Sunday shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said there was "unease about the outcome of the vote".
"It's not what I wanted," he wrote on his website. "I share the unease that we have gone from a stringent conditions-based approach to any UK military action to an unconditional policy of UK military inaction."
Meanwhile, Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad told the BBC that any military action against Syria would amount to "support for al-Qaeda and its affiliates", claiming armed groups backed by America had used chemical weapons - not Syrian troops.
On Sunday, Mr Hague told the BBC he did not believe new information about the attack would make a difference to the MPs who doubted the government's case.
He said: "I don't think on any issue the government can go back to parliament every few days, or every week with the same proposition, and our proposition already included waiting for the UN weapon inspectors to report, to discuss things at the Security Council, that was already built into our proposal.
"So on this particular issue that we voted for on Thursday; can we go back in the coming days and have that vote again? Well no, we can't do that. Parliament has spoken."
'Failure of leadership'
Earlier, Chancellor George Osborne also said that waiting for more evidence would not have made a difference to the MPs' decision.
"I don't feel, frankly, more evidence or another week or more UN reports would have convinced them," he said.
But Sir Malcolm Rifkind - chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee - said: "Parliament ought to have the opportunity to debate the matter again" if the evidence was agreed to be compelling.
George Osborne: "Very sad if we turned our back on world"
Former Liberal Democrat leader Lord Ashdown also suggested MPs and peers would want to "reconsider" their position following President Obama's move to put US involvement to a vote.
Syria's President Bashar al-Assad blames opposition forces for the attack on 21 August and says his country will defend itself against any Western "aggression".
President Obama's surprising decision to ask Congress for approval means that a strike which was thought to be imminent will now not go ahead before 9 September, when Congress reconvenes.
The opposition Syrian National Coalition called Mr Obama's decision to delay possible military action a "failure of leadership", saying it could "embolden" President Assad's forces
More than 100,000 people are estimated to have died and at least 1.7 million refugees displaced since civil conflict erupted in Syria in March 2011.
The violence began when Syrian security forces clamped down on anti-government protests.
Đăng ký: Tieng Anh Vui
Posted in: 
0 comments:
Post a Comment