The Stop the War Coalition event in Parliament on 2 November was only the latest in a series where they have tried to exclude Syrians from discussion of their own country
The Syria Solidarity Movement UK was formed to give solidarity to the people of Syria in their struggle for a democratic and free Syria. Our membership is made up of Syrians and friends of Syrians. Our positions are led by the needs and demands of Syrians suffering brutally at the hands of a criminal regime.
Stop the War Coalition was formed in 2001 to oppose US and UK military action against the Taliban. Its cause is opposition to UK military and foreign policy. Its focus is Western-centric and UK-centric, only actively opposing military action by the UK and its allies, while providing at most lip service to criticising military action by states opposed to the UK. The justification it gives for this is that as a UK organisation it has no influence over these other states.
It follows that Syria Solidarity UK and Stop the War have very different concerns regarding Syria: Syria Solidarity is concerned with ending the suffering of Syrians under the Assad dictatorship; Stop the War with opposing any UK military involvement regardless of consequences for Syrians.
We oppose the British government’s proposal to mimic the American ISIS-only counter-terrorism war; not only do we believe it is immoral to fly missions in Syria against ISIS while leaving the even greater killer, Assad, free to bomb civilians en masse, we also believe that any war against ISIS that doesn’t put the needs of the Syrian people first will be a failure that can only prolong their suffering.
We do call for action to protect civilians in Syria, including limited military action to enforce a no-bombing zone.
Stop the War similarly oppose British government proposals to bomb ISIS, but not because they would leave Assad alone; for Stop the War also oppose any action against Assad. This puts Stop the War against Syrians who are being bombed by Assad: it puts them not just against Syrian revolutionaries but also against Syrian doctors, against Syrian White Helmets rescue volunteers, and against Syrian civil society activists, all of whom call for international action to stop Assad’s bombs.
This is why Stop the War don’t want to listen to Syrians.
THREE LIES?
The Stop the War Coalition event in Parliament on 2 November was only the latest in a series where they have tried to exclude Syrians from discussion of their own country. Now the embarrassing exposure of their attitude on the BBC’s Daily Politics show has led them to issue a statement claiming they are being lied about.
This statement lists three claimed lies about their 2 November meeting: that Stop the War’s Andrew Murray had called for support for the Assad government to fight ISIS, that Syrians were prevented from speaking at the meeting, and that Police were called to the meeting to control protesters.
THE FIRST
Denying the first, Stop the War say Andrew Murray’s position is that ISIS can only be defeated by strong and credible governments in Syria and Iraq. If Andrew Murray does not mean Assad when he talks of a Syrian government, what does he mean? Elsewhere he makes clear that he is against the fall of Assad, saying that a no-fly zone should be opposed because “regime change is the real agenda.”
Andrew Murray also calls on foreign powers to abandon “all the preconditions laid down for negotiations,” language that echoes the Assad regime and its backers in Moscow. Why? Because there is just one precondition that is contested: the demand that Assad step down. This was not originally a Western demand, but first and foremost a Syrian demand.
So Andrew Murray’s “strong and credible government” is one where there is no change of regime, and no demand for Assad to step down: in other words, a continuation of the Assad regime.
There is no lie here.
THE SECOND
Denying the second, Stop the War say Syrians were not prevented from speaking at the meeting, and claim that Syria Solidarity activist Muzna “was given ample time at the meeting to make her case” at Stop the War’s meeting. Not so.
Stop the War did allow Muzna Al-Naib to speak in the meeting, but only when other members of the audience called for her to be heard. She was the only Syrian allowed to speak, she was interrupted, and for the rest of the meeting all other Syrians were deliberately ignored by the Chair, Diane Abbott, even when other speakers Catherine West MP and Caroline Lucas MP said they wanted to hear from Syrians. Caroline Lucas has since said she wrote to Stop the War about the way the meeting was conducted.
And so the second is no lie either.
THE THIRD
Stop the War deny that Police were called to the meeting to control protesters. This is the most blatant and astonishing falsehood. Police in the Houses of Parliament were called to the meeting. Syrian and Arab audience members were repeatedly told “you are going to get arrested.” One Syria Solidarity activist was prevented from re-entering the meeting by Police who arrived in numbers and were visible to all at the doors of the meeting by its end. One of the Arab attendees denied the opportunity to speak by the Chair was also talked to by Police after the meeting.
So finally, no lie here.
DON’T BOMB SYRIA?
If Stop the War’s slogan “Don’t bomb Syria” is to have any meaning, let them demand the end of the regime whose bombs have killed so many.
If Stop the War oppose imperialism let them demonstrate their sincerity outside the Russian Embassy. Let them demonstrate with placards calling for Russia to stop bombing Syrian hospitals.
Lastly, if Stop the War are against war, let them stop denying war crimes; for this is their latest response, publishing a claim that Assad wasn’t responsible for the Ghouta chemical weapons massacre, “because it was so obviously not in Assad’s political and military interests.”
This latest comes in an article by Matt Carr. He writes that he has “never really doubted the brutality of the Syrian regime” before going on to do just that by claiming Assad’s violence has been deliberately exaggerated. Matt Carr is known as a champion of refugees; he should listen to them, and learn that most Syrian refugees are fleeing Assad’s violence.
His argument as to why he doesn’t believe Assad responsible for the Ghouta massacre crosses the line from naive to wilfully ignorant. Assad repeatedly tested the West’s willingness to act with smaller chemical attacks prior to Ghouta, and confirmed there was little or none. Assad’s forces were the only party with the industrial capacity to produce the amount of Sarin chemical used, the only party to have the kinds of rockets used in the attack, and the only party with a clear motive to kill the civilians in those neighbourhoods.
Matt Carr goes on about polls of Assad’s popularity: this in a dictatorship which has tortured thousands to death. Who under regime control would dare answer no? Incredibly, one such survey was an internet poll with no more than 98 respondents in Syria.
He asks “what would happen to the Syrians that have supported the regime” if the Free Syrian Army win. The question Matt Carr fails to grasp is what is happening to millions of the dictator’s victims right now? The Free Syrian Army are the people who have defended their homes, freedom and justice against Assad for the last five years and against ISIS for the last three, and who are now being bombed by Assad’s ally Putin. The Free Syrian Army are not the ones levelling neighbourhoods and driving millions from their homes.
Syrian civilians need protection from Assad’s mass murder. Stop the War have nothing to offer Syrians, and so they stop their ears.
The Syria Solidarity Movement UK is a network of activists, academics, trade unionists, lawyers, socialists, doctors, nurses, students committed to solidarity with the Syrian Revolution
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
37 Responses to “Why Stop the War don’t want to listen to Syrians”
JAMES MCGIBBON
Stop the War do not want to stop the war. They want it to continue until the side they support wins. They probably do not know which side they support and in a few years if the war continues they will still not have a clue who they support. The body count is irrelevant to them.
JAMES MCGIBBON
It was intervention that caused the war. And this nonsense called the Arab Spring had already started and the Sunni Islamic Brotherhood saw an opportunity to impose themselves on Syria. They had tried it before and lost very quickly. However with Western help this has become protracted. The ancient lesson that muslims in muslim countries have no need for democracy evades the West. Muslims that live in the West only accept democracy because they have to while they are in the minority. That minority is growing.
Dave Stewart
I couldn’t agree more.
Of course the suffering of the Syrian people is horrific and anyone with any sense of humanity would want the war to end as quickly and bloodlessly as possible but the idea that Britain (and the US) getting involved is somehow going to fix everything is naive at best. Look at our history of intervention around the world. More often than not we cause just as much suffering from unintended consequences as that which we have managed to stop through intervention. It is the legacy of our previous interventions which has helped create the situation we see today.
If there were a time when UK intervention would have been most useful it would have been right at the beginning of the conflict before the various Islamist factions got involved and before it became a proxy war for Saudi and Iran, not to mention all of the various other nations with vested interests in one side or the other. I think the time has long since past and the situation is now so complex and intertwined with various regional and global power plays that military intervention now would be a disaster of massive proportions.
Stop the war have a very clear aim and have always done so. They oppose UK military interventions. Of course you are not going to get much of a hearing if you are actively seeking UK military intervention. Don’t go to a dog show and expect to convince everyone there that cats are better.
Dick Gregory
“You as a group want UK military action in Syria.”
Straw man. Nobody said they wanted UK military action in Syria, the SSM wants the military action to stop. You seem happy like Stop the War, for the bombing to continue, along with the sieges, torture and rape that has defined Assad’s child-murdering reign. To say that because the Free Syrian Army aren’t trusted by the Americans doesn’t mean they aren’t trusted by Syrians to defend them against this genocide, that’s why civilians have been fleeing from Hama and Homs where the Russians have been bombing the Free Army. To call them a proxy army is grotesque. The proxy army are the thousands of Shiites the Iranians have brought in to try and take South Aleppo; like other mercenary invaders they will make little progress against determined Syrians, but will help to spread the conflict between Sunni and Shia. The only way this war is going to stop is when a régime that tortures children and is intent on burning the country it cannot control is gone, if that seems simple so be it.
Old Major
The Assad family have ruled Syria since they seized power in1970 and isn’t it strange that they have won all those ‘free’ elections ever since ?