- Six oil wellheads struck in eastern Syria
- Eight more British jets on the way to the region
- Prime minister warns that military campaign will ‘take time’
- Recriminations against Labour MPs who backed action
Def Sec: We are doubling UK strike force against #Daesh by sending 2 Tornados & 6 Typhoons to @RoyalAirForce Akrotiri today.
Remember that Oldham is 1st by-election since May 2013 where there's been no published polling.
Britain’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Matthew Rycroft, has written to the president of the security council, Samantha Power, officially notifying her of the UK’s decision to join airstrikes on Syria.
I am writing to report to the Security Council that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is taking necessary and proportionate measures against ISIL/Daesh in Syria, as called for in resolution 2249, in exercise of the inherent right of individual and collective self-defence.
My colleague Mark Tran has written a guide to the organisations who will be telling us what’s happening on the ground in Syria.
As the UK joins the air war on Islamic State in Syria, the government will be updating the public on its version of events, detailing what it believes has been hit. But a more nuanced picture may emerge from other entities equally interested in what is happening on the ground. To get a balanced view observers will be paying attention to multiple sources.
The Guardian’s defence and security expert, Richard Norton-Taylor, has written a blogpost setting out why he thinks airstrikes in Syria are unlikely to have much of an effect on Isis. It’s an interesting read. This is how it starts:
“War” on Isis scream the headlines. RAF Tornado strikes, soon after the Commons vote, “dealt a real blow” to Isis-controlled oilfields in eastern Syria, declared Michael Fallon, the defence secretary.
British jets joining US and French bombing strikes on their own will achieve very little in the fight against Isis. The Commons vote enabling British pilots to bomb targets across the border in Syria as well as in Iraq was significant politically and diplomatically (especially in face of appeals from the French government). It will not make our streets any safer.
BuzzFeed News is reporting that Labour will email all party members to warn them that they should not bully or harass MPs, families or constituency staff. The text of the email is expected to be similar to the Facebook post released by Jeremy Corbyn last night.
This is from our legal affairs correspondent, Owen Bowcott:
The justice secretary, Michael Gove, has scrapped the mandatory criminal courts charge after more than 100 magistrates resigned in protest.
The abrupt U-turn ditches a money-raising scheme introduced by the previous justice secretary, Chris Grayling, that only came into force in April this year. The move is part of a broader Ministry of Justice review of court penalties and fines.
The pro-Corbyn, Labour party campaign group, Momentum, has released a statement saying they “strongly disapprove” of any threatening or bullying of MPs, and that they will not campaign to deselect members who voted in favour of airstrikes:
Momentum is disappointed that Parliament voted for Syrian airstrikes last night. We do not believe that David Cameron made the case that bombs will defeat Daesh or improve the lives and security of Syrians, the UK or our allies, and we fear that they may have the opposite effect.
Nevertheless, we are pleased that the majority of Labour MPs and the shadow cabinet did oppose David Cameron’s proposal, reflecting the policy of the party conference and the wishes of its members. We also respect and acknowledge the right of all MPs to vote as they have done.
Members of the Labour Party and the public have a right to be heard. Momentum is proud that we assisted over 30,000 people email their MP asking them not to vote for bombing. We believe these messages from the public helped convince some of the 153 Labour and 72 non-Labour MPs who voted against bombing to do so. It can never be a threat to express your views to your elected representative.
Speaking in parliament earlier today, the leader of the House of Commons, Chris Grayling, said MPs would be given updates on the military strikes in Syria before parliament broke up for the Christmas recess on 17 December.
Following yesterday’s debate, when MPs on both sides said they would expect regular updates on the situation in Syria, can I inform the house the government intends to provide a proper update statement before the Christmas recess? I’m sure the whole house will want to join me in sending good wishes to the British air crew involved in action overnight.
David Cameron has been chatting to Angela Merkel over the phone. According to a Downing Street spokesperson, the German chancellor congratulated Cameron on the outcome of yesterday’s vote to extend airstrikes to Syria. The pair also agreed that it was unlikely Cameron would get an agreement on his EU renegotiation demands at the December European Council meeting. Here’s a statement:
The Prime Minister called the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, this morning to talk about the renegotiation of the UK’s membership of the EU ahead of the December European Council.
They discussed the significant and far-reaching reforms that the Prime Minister has proposed to address the concerns of the British people. They agreed that good progress had been made since the Prime Minister’s letter to the President of the European Council but that there remain difficult issues to resolve.
The MoD’s communications team is in overdrive, with the department’s Twitter account pumping out information.
We have answered some of the most common questions on UK air strikes in #Iraq& #Syria here: https://t.co/TZ9RNCqzLapic.twitter.com/PeN5pACFED
While military operations are never without risk UK forces strive for the highest level of accuracy. That is why the RAF uses precise, low collateral weapons systems supported by thorough intelligence.
In more than a year of strikes against Daesh targets in Iraq, there have been no reports of civilian casualties resulting from UK air operations. RAF Tornado and Reaper aircraft have flown a total of 1,632 combat missions and have carried out more than 380 successful strikes in Iraq.
It’s Frances Perraudin here, taking over from Haroon for the rest of the afternoon.
Here is a Ministry of Defence blogpost about the media coverage of the airstrikes.
More on last night's vote on military action in #Syria#DefeatingDaesh in today's blog https://t.co/YKUswKXYqMpic.twitter.com/DlBJ4Xiicx
The Financial Times reports on yesterday’s news that Montenegro has been invited to become the 29th Nato nation. The paper writes that the move is Nato’s first enlargement for six years, and that it could provoke possible retaliation from Russia, which has portrayed Nato enlargement into former communist eastern Europe as a threat to its borders. The Wall Street Journal also carries this story.
There’s been a lot today about the proclaimed magnificence of Hilary Benn’s speech but in the interests of balance, here are a couple of less flattering descriptions.
Brendan O’Neill in the Spectator writes:
Benn’s speech, and the feverish reaction to it, confirms that British politicians, especially Labourite ones, really, really miss the Second World War. They crave the moral certainty of that conflict that pitted Us against the worst Them imaginable: a vast, murderous system of Nazism.
This is why Benn madly talked about the decision to fire a few rockets at the godforsaken city of Raqqa in the same breath as Britain’s long slog of a war against Hitler and Mussolini. Such a comparison is the height of historical illiteracy.
Hilary Benn’s speech was not the masterstroke of a consummate statesman; it was disingenuous nonsense. Even on the level of pure rhetoric: he imitated better speakers by occasionally varying his tone, rising from a sincere whisper to tub-thumping declamation without much regard for the actual content of what he was saying; this is now apparently what passes from great oratory. The speech was liberally garnished with dull clichés: “clear and present danger”, “safe haven”, “shoulder to shoulder”, “play our part”, “do our bit”. He said “Daesh” a lot, and mispronounced it every time.
And then there’s what he actually said. Hilary Benn has form here: he voted for the 2003 war in Iraq (making him far more responsible for the rise of Isis than some of the people who will die in the airstrikes he’s so passionately promoting) and the disastrous 2011 air war in Libya. Much of his speech is familiar invocation of the just war doctrine: laying out the brutality of Isis, as if the eight British jets we’re sending could put an end to it; asking “what message would [not acting] send?”, as if the self-image of the British state were worth a single innocent life.
Here’s footage of David Cameron discussing how military action in Syria will “take time”.
The shadow work and pensions secretarym Owen Smith, who opposed airstrikes, has branded Ken Livingstone’s backing for deselections “disgraceful”.
He told BBC Radio 4’s World At One programme:
I think that’s a disgraceful thing to say, and I certainly wouldn’t support that in any way, shape or form, and I don’t think that is reflected by a majority or even a significant minority in the Labour party.
The people who voted with the government yesterday evening did so with good conscience and on the merits of the case that they saw, and I know many of them wrestled with that decision.
We must not in any way demean them for making that absolutely justified and understandable decision. There is no room in our party, of all parties, for abuse.
The prime minister’s key view on this is it’s fundamental that MPs are able to express their views and set out their positions in the House on issues of great importance such as the debate we had yesterday.
The bombing of oil fields in Syria robs civilians of the infrastructure they depend upon in their day-to-day lives and will further alienate the local people from the western cause, experts on the Middle East have warned (quotes from PA).
Tim Eaton, a Middle East analyst and the project manager for Chatham House’s Syria and Its Neighbours Policy Initiative, said:
What happens a lot of the time is that we are presented with this premise that bombing terrorists is a good thing to do and that we oppose Isis and that there may be some civilian casualties which are unfortunate collateral in those strikes.
What we often do not consider is that even soft targets such as oil infrastructure and the infrastructure targets that the defence secretary was talking about today in IS-controlled areas are also the infrastructure that the civilians in those areas rely upon.
When we think about defeating Isis in the long term, we have to understand that it is about winning over those people. In this sense, airstrikes also hurt those people as well as Isis.
It sounds great to degrade Isis’s finances and tackle them that way. It sounds like a humane way of tackling them and limiting Isis’s impact. But it is impossible to completely disassociate that impact on Isis from the impact on the people in the areas that they govern.
A year ago, the United States thought it could disrupt Isis oil operations by focusing on the improvised refineries. But in October they decided to get a little more intensive and started attacking wellheads, which are in a sense part of Syria’s national infrastructure.
Syria’s national government issued a statement complaining about the attacks on these facilities.
From what I know about the fields where they are present, they would be in a position to produce 30,000 to 40,000 oil barrels a day at most. The oilfields where they operate are in steep decline and are complicated to operate.
You are talking about really very small amounts of oil which gets distributed in ever-smaller parcels.
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, has added her protest to complaints from Scottish politicians, including the SNP Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, about the vote in favour of airstrikes, which exposed a substantial geographical divide between MPs.
Only two of Scotland’s 59 MPs voted in favour, while 55 sitting and suspended Scottish National party MPs and Labour’s only Scottish MP opposed the bombing. Maps showing that split were being circulated on Twitter by pro-independence campaigners.
Divided Kingdom: light red vote against bombing Syria, dark red voted in favour. https://t.co/wfjASldVpx#SyriaVotepic.twitter.com/3myFI4fkvY
I remain deeply troubled by the decision of the UK government to take the country into conflict with no strategy, no exit plan and against the wishes of the overwhelming majority of Scottish MPs.
Hilary Benn, widely lauded for his speech during last night’s debate, has praised the men and women who will carry out airstrikes on Syria.
David Cameron has said Britain’s “complex and difficult” military action in Syria “is going to take time” and will require patience and persistence.
The defence secretary, Michael Fallon, indicated earlier that it could take years.
My colleague Rowena Mason writes that recriminations have begun against Labour MPs who voted for airstrikes:
Hilary Benn, the shadow foreign secretary, was the main focus of anger for protesters as he was accused online of warmongering and bringing shame on his late father, Tony Benn, who had strong roots in the anti-war movement.
Stella Creasy, MP for Walthamstow, north-east London, where campaigners had marched outside her office, was also targeted with hundreds of negative and sometimes abusive messages. She has promised to hold a public meeting on Sunday to explain her decision.
US central command’s latest update shows that there were 14 coalition military strikes (ie not just by US aircraft) yesterday.
This is far higher than in recent days. For example, there were two strikes in Syria on Tuesday and only one on Monday.
* Near Ar Raqqah, one strike struck an Isil tactical unit and destroyed an Isil check point.
* Near Abu Kamal, three strikes struck three Isil oilfield wellheads.
Hilary Benn’s niece, Emily, has reacted angrily to comments made by former SNP leader Alex Salmond about her uncle, in the wake of his speech urging airstrikes during yesterday’s debate:
@georgeeaton@AlexSalmond Mr Salmond, Your comments are both deeply offensive and simply untrue. I hope you reflect and retract them
There has been gushing acclaim for Hilary Benn this morning, who is being credited with swaying many undecided MPs to vote for airstrikes in Syria. The defence secretary, Michael Fallon, called it one of the best speeches he’d heard in his 30 plus years in parliament.
Interesting in that context to note that Benn did not seem that convinced of the case for airstrikes himself just two weeks ago.
2 weeks ago & "Hilary Benn: Shadow Foreign Secretary says Labour won't back air strikes on Syria" @alextomo#Syriahttps://t.co/CjwznbL1xD
Mr Benn, who supports military intervention to protect civilians, said he did not think the government was planning to come forward with a proposal to extend airstrikes from Iraq into Syria.
But asked if he thought they should, Mr Benn said: “No.” He added: “They have to come up with an overall plan, which they have not done. I think the focus for now is finding a peaceful solution to the civil war.”
The SNP, whose 56 MPs, all voted against airstrikes, started a petition after the vote titled “Don’t bomb Syria”. It has already got around 70,000 signatures. The petition states:
Despite all SNP MPs voting against airstrikes on Syria, the House of Commons has agreed to back the UK Government’s call for military action.
The SNP believes that the UK should not repeat the mistakes of the past, and engage in military action without a comprehensive and credible plan to win the peace.
My colleague Ewan MacAskill has examined the strategy for targeting Isis:
Although the strike on the oil industry will hurt Isis finances, oil is only one source of revenue for the group. Fallon described oil as its main revenue source, but that is debatable , Much of its financing comes from heavy taxes imposed on the population under its control, making it almost self-sufficient. Other revenue sources include the sale of antiquities and, the US claims, the sale of slaves. Isis also took an estimated £500m from banks when it occupied Mosul, in Iraq, and other towns and cities. All this makes it much better financed than al-Qaida ever was ...
Another part of the strategy is to cut off the routes that link the Isis cities and towns. In the last few weeks, the road between Raqqa and Mosul, has been cut. UK troops – there are about 200 left in Iraq; the US has 3,500 – are helping with training and advising Kurdish troops in the north and the Iraqi army.
The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has said he does not believe the bombing campaign in Syria increases the threat of a terror attack on the UK capital.
Visiting the Bataclan theatre in Paris where 89 people died in the attacks on the French capital less than three weeks ago, Johnson said:
I think that argument is topsy turvy. The number of attacks has been growing from that area of Syria, the plans that have been germinating, and we need to do something about it.
The former footballer Stan Collymore has cancelled his Labour membership and joined the Scottish National party in protest at the votes by “Tory lite” Labour MPs in favour of air strikes on Syria.
Done. No more Tories infiltrating the grand old party of working people anymore. Time to change. pic.twitter.com/cYSz4KHYPQ
I’ll support my local party @GracieSamuels , its in my blood and a huge part of who i am. Can’t stress how 67 LP MP’S made me feel sick.
The real Benn. Accept no fake imitations. https://t.co/evQM4s6LG9
Rethink Rebuild Society, a Manchester-based campaign group on Syrian issues, has said it regrets parliament’s decision to bomb Syria and that no progress can be made in the country without first addressing the use of force by President Bashar al-Assad. It said in a statement:
Our involvement in the coalition will not necessarily make the UK safer from the threat posed by terrorist groups, nor is it expected to have any significant impact in addressing radicalisation on the ground in Syria. Rather, it very much has the potential to fan the flames of radicalisation and therefore expose us to greater vulnerabilities.
We stress that any threat that Isil [Islamic State] poses to the UK is ultimately attributable to the Assad regime.Without first addressing the Assad regime’s indiscriminate use of force in Syria, which created the violence, chaos, and destruction that allowed for the emergence of terrorist groups in Syria, we cannot begin to tackle the threat posed by Isil. In the current situation, even a successful military campaign against Isil will lead to the emergence of similar groups to fill the void created by the Assad regime’s destruction.
Here is video of shadow chancellor John McDonnell giving his view on the Hilary Benn speech during last night’s debate that everyone seems to be talking about:
Ken Livingstone, who is jointly leading a review into Labour’s defence policy, suggested he would support efforts to deselect pro-war MPs.
The former London mayor told LBC:
If I had an MP who had voted to bomb Syria then I would be prepared to support someone to challenge him.
My colleague Michael White writes that Hilary Benn’s speech may have placed the shadow foreign secretary at odds with late father, but its impact owes much to Tony’s formidable way with words:
Wednesday night’s powerful Commons speech, by far the best which some MPs remember hearing from the often diffident Hilary, owed much to his father’s formidable style, even down to the moral as well as political framing of his own decision to back bombing: Labour is an internationalist party which supports the UN and ‘fights fascism’, he said to widespread applause on the Tory benches, quiet dismay in Corbynite Labour ranks, and rage on Twitter. ‘Fascism’ is a very Tony Benn way of putting it.
Andy Burnham has explained why he voted against airstrikes.
He said:
I was horrified as the chaos began to unfold in Iraq in the years after the invasion. Now, I applied that test to this vote. Was there a clear plan for Syria, for the aftermath? And I couldn’t see it.
"I had too many doubts". Labour's @andyburnhamMP, voted no to air strikes as he couldn't see a clear plan for Syria. https://t.co/Dqsx6z8POz
Alex Salmond is unhappy about the deployment of jets from RAF Lossiemouth in Moray:
The UK has deployed jets from Scotland to bomb Syria less than 12 hours since 57 out of 59 Scots MP rejected these actions. #DontBombSyria
The Guardian is asking readers how they would have voted. You can share your thoughts here.
After Hilary Benn’s speech in favour of airstrikes in Syria was cheered by members of both benches, the shadow defence secretary has been installed as the favourite to succeed Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader.
Two weeks ago, Hilary Benn was 25/1 to be next Labour leader. Today, he's 3/1 favourite. https://t.co/42czQ9XwAbpic.twitter.com/eRljB0QxI0
I thought Hilary’s oratory was great. It reminded me of Tony Blair’s speech taking us into the Iraq War.
I’m always anxious that sometimes the greatest oratory can lead us to the greatest mistakes, as well.
Here is video of the defence secretary, Michael Fallon, explaining the RAF’s targets in the overnight airstrikes:
This BBC tool allows you to see which way your MP voted:
Did your MP vote for air strikes in Syria? Find out here https://t.co/KTuSDcUpXxpic.twitter.com/HcGwDgHWsb
The Labour MP for Birmingham Yardley, Jess Phillips, who voted against the airstrikes has written an interesting blog for the Huffington Post. She writes about the difficulty of deciding which way to vote and condemns the righteousness of those who have complete certainty that they were in the right:
I’m not revelling in my decision, I’m living with it. I’m not pleased to see the hyperbolic back slapping righteous tweets of some at the top of my party speaking of death tolls, and civilian losses. I don’t like any language about how this being blood on our hands or any such platitude. People will die no matter what decision was made. Feeling right won’t stop the death toll. People will die at the hands of Daesh in the east and west regardless of our vote. I won’t sleep sounder tonight feeling righteous any more than I did last night feeling worried.
Each and every MP made an impossible decision. It’s not bravery it’s not noble, it is our job. We were elected to do it so other people didn’t have to. Don’t let’s gloat about our decisions from any side please.
Here is a breakdown of how the parties voted:
In Moscow, Putin is giving his annual address to Russia’s elite, with one of the main themes being the fight against terrorism and Moscow’s bombing campaign in Syria. He starts by thanking Russian servicemen “fighting international terrorism”. He says Russia has known what terrorism is over the years and says the current Russian campaign in Syria is “a fight for freedom, truth and justice”.
Putin again calls for a unified coalition to fight terrorism, and says it is unacceptable to delineate between different terrorist groups. The Russian airstrikes have hit many groups that western countries do not consider terrorists. Putin also makes it clear once again who he blames for the current terrorist threat.
Iraq, Libya and Syria have turned into zones of chaos and anarchy which threaten the whole world. And of course we know why this happened. We know who wanted to change inconvenient regimes, and crudely impose their rules. And what was the result? They made a mess, ruined the states, turned different peoples against each other and then, as we say in Russia, washed their hands of the places, opening the road for radicals, extremists and terrorists.
The Ministry of Defence has released a statement on the airstrikes. It says initial analysis suggests the strikes were successful:
Overnight, RAF Tornado GR4s, supported by a Voyager air refuelling tanker and a Reaper, and operating in conjunction with other coalition aircraft, employed Paveway IV guided bombs to conduct strikes against six targets within the extensive oilfield at Omar, 35 miles inside Syria’s eastern border with Iraq. The Omar oilfield is one of the largest and most important to Daesh’s financial operations, and represents over 10% of their potential income from oil. Carefully selected elements of the oilfield infrastructure were targeted, ensuring the strikes will have a significant impact on Daesh’s ability to extract the oil to fund their terrorism.
Coalition air operations have already degraded Daesh’s frontline military capabilities and have assisted the Iraqi ground forces in liberating some 30% of the territory that the terrorists initially seized in that country during the summer of 2014. By extending RAF offensive operations into Syria, our aircraft are now able to help dismantle the means by which Daesh plan, direct and sustain their campaign of terror.
This map shows the location of the airstrikes:
Here is a list of the Labour MPs who voted in favour of airstrikes:
ICYMI: Here are the 66 Labour MPs who backed Syria air strikes pic.twitter.com/wZS8XXWaxe
Major General Jonathan Shaw, a former colonel commandant of the Parachute Regiment, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme the military effect of Britain joining the bombing would be “marginal”, but that Britain’s participation had important symbolic value (quotes from PA):
We won’t have any more decisive effect than everyone else has had. The bombing campaign on Syria has been going on for some time and we are merely adding our - relatively speaking - small part to that battle. We should not expect any decisive shock to the air campaign.
What this bombing does is it makes the UK appear a wholehearted contributor to the campaign against Isis rather than a partial player. It’s very good in that respect, because it means when David Cameron sits down with other people in the Vienna talks, his voice carries more weight.
Amid all the rancour within the parliamentary Labour party over last night’s vote, ConservativeHome’s Paul Goodman suggests Jeremy Corbyn – about whom he is otherwise very uncomplimentary – could benefit if public opinion turns against the airstrikes. In a blogpost headlined “Nine consequences of yesterday’s Commons vote”, he writes:
His leadership of Labour is a dog’s breakfast, lunch and dinner – over yesterday evening’s vote and everything else. It is almost impossible to imagine him winning the general election in 2020. He may well have been deposed by then. Among those opposing him yesterday were his own deputy and his defence spokesman. But if voters turn against bombing, he is placed to profit. He would claim that he took a stand on principle, and has been proved right.
Speaking to LBC radio, the defence secretary, Michael Fallon, said the UK was “bringing a precision to the strikes that limits collateral damage”.
He said this precision had been in play in Iraq but not in Syria until now (which doesn’t say much for Britain’s allies).
Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently, the activist collective which operates inside the city, has come out publicly against the aerial campaign, saying it was pointless without anyone on the ground fighting Isis and that if Britain wants to help Syrians it ought to accept more refugees. Here’s a series of tweets they put out overnight:
1-we are against the #UK strikes on #Raqqa all the world is bombing #Raqqa UK will not make any change in The situation #Syria#ISIL
2-if #UK want to help people then they should Accepts Syrian Refugees in there country and not close the border #Syria#ISIS#ISIL
3-Just bombing #ISIS In #Raqqa from the sky will not Defeat #ISIS but it will make people Suffers more #Syria#ISIL
4-#ISIS will use #UK strikes to Recruit new people in the west and new fighters and maybe they will do Terrorist attacks #Syria#ISIL
5-the Strange thing is all the world want to fight #ISIS but not even 1 country Dare to send 1 soldier to fight #IS on the ground #Syria
6-which make #ISIS propaganda more stronger to recruit new people and make them look like they are on the right side and the good people
7-using some groups not from the area by some countries for the Liberation of #Raqqa is a big mistake that #ISIS use it to make people join
8-them and it make a sensitivity between the people of the area that could lead to another kind of war in the end #Syria#ISIS#ISIL#Raqqa
The French president, François Hollande, has welcomed the British airstrikes. Here is the statement released by his office:
The President welcomed the first British air operations over Syria intervened this morning immediately after the vote obtained yesterday by a large majority in parliament.
Fallon says:
We need to remorselessly squeeze the terrorists and one way is to cut off their source of money and we made a start on that last night.
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon is on the Today programme now.
He confirms eight more RAF jets are en route to the UK base in Cyprus.
The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, described last night’s vote as a mistake.
He compared Hilary Benn’s impassioned call to bomb Isis to Tony Blair’s speech before the Iraq war. Asked how he felt about a member of the shadow cabinet making a speech directly contradicting the Labour leader, McDonnell said:
It made me proud that in the Labour party we allow people to vote with their conscience.
If you use that sort of language on either side … you should not be in the party.
My colleague Haroon Siddique in London will be taking over our live coverage now. Here’s where we stand:
This is not the first western strike on the Omar oilfields, which were targeted in October as part of a new US-led strategy to hit Isis’s finances, the New York Times reports.
The first evidence of the new strategy came on Oct 21, when B-1 bombers and other allied warplanes hit 26 targets in the Omar oilfield, one of the two largest oil-production sites in all of Syria. American military analysts estimate the Omar field generates $1.7 million to $5.1 million per month for the Islamic State. French warplanes struck another oilfield nearby earlier this week.
The defence secretary, Michael Fallon, has said that the RAF bombing raids targeted the Omar oilfield in eastern Syria, dealing a “real blow” to the financing of Isis.
Fallon confirmed that he personally approved the targets in the Omar oilfield before Wednesday night’s House of Commons vote, and gave final permission for the raid to go ahead after MPs had given their approval for the extension of airstrikes from Iraq to Syria.
He indicated that military action against Isis could be expected to continue for years, rather than months, telling BBC1’s Breakfast: “This is not going to be quick.”
“I can confirm that four British Tornados were in action after the vote last night attacking oilfields in eastern Syria - the Omar oilfields - from which the Daesh terrorists receive a huge part of their revenue.”
In a stream of tweets, the team of activists and journalists at Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently have expressed their opposition to the UK joining the bombing campaign in Syria. Here’s a sample:
1-we are against the #UK strikes on #Raqqa all the world is bombing #Raqqa UK will not make any change in The situation #Syria#ISIL
2-if #UK want to help people then they should Accepts Syrian Refugees in there country and not close the border #Syria#ISIS#ISIL
3-Just bombing #ISIS In #Raqqa from the sky will not Defeat #ISIS but it will make people Suffers more #Syria#ISIL
4-#ISIS will use #UK strikes to Recruit new people in the west and new fighters and maybe they will do Terrorist attacks #Syria#ISIL
Related: Airstrikes have become routine for people in Raqqa, says activist
#Raqqa the place of the Drone strike that killed #JihadiJohn in #Raqqa on 12 Of NOV #Syria#ISIL#ISISpic.twitter.com/xEJ4oPPRcQ
Some early reaction to news of this morning’s bombing of Isis targets in Syria: Sir Michael Graydon, former chief of the air staff, has told the BBC the targets of the airstrikes will have been carefully identified.
“The sort of targets that they’ve attacked, as I understand it on this occasion, will be very clear. There should be no doubt that these will be oil installations,” he said.
One critic of the British decision to begin airstrikes in Syria is Nicolas Hénin, a French journalist who was held hostage by Islamic State for 10 months and released in April 2014.
In a five-minute video said to have been recorded in the past few days in Paris and posted on YouTube by the Syria Campaign, Hénin said: “Strikes on Isis are a trap. The winner of this war will not be the parties that have the newest, most expensive, most sophisticated weaponry, but the party that manages to have the people on its side.”
A key rationale in David Cameron’s case for airstrikes in Syria is the existence of 70,000 moderate Syrian ground troops who he says stand ready to work with foreign forces to retake Raqqa, Isis’ Syrian stronghold.
But as my colleague Ewan MacAskill writes, the PM has so far failed to clarify which groups make up these forces, where they are based, or their ideological hue. On Wednesday night Cameron also appeared to recast the readiness of these troops to take on Isis.
In a sign of backtracking, the prime minister made an important switch in emphasis from last week: from such a force being willing and ready on the ground to one that might be in the future. Such a future would require a peace settlement between President Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian army and the Free Syrian Army, freeing them all up to unite in the fight against Isis.
Wednesday’s decisive Commons debate will be remembered for Hilary Benn’s wind-up speech, in which he powerfully (but politely) challenged his own leader and asserted Labour’s claim to be the party of activist, hard-edged internationalism. Towards the end, he compared the imperative to bomb Isis in Syria to ‘why this entire House stood up against Hitler and Mussolini’.
Hours after the UK parliament voted to authorise airstrikes in Syria RAF jets have flown their first sorties. Here’s what we know so far:
Thursday morning’s strikes were focused on six targets in an Isis-controlled oilfield in eastern Syria, the BBC is reporting.
The Tornado jets used Raptor pods, two-metre long surveillance devices fixed underneath the aircrafts, to scope out their targets, supported by an RAF Reaper unmanned drone.
The MoD has declined to say what exactly its fighters have targeted in Syria. A press conference is reportedly planned for later this morning, and a full list of strikes will be published in the coming days.
My colleague Ewan MacAskill has more on how targets are selected, and raises the possibility that Thursday morning’s strikes may have been preplanned to send a message.
Targets in Iraq and Syria are chosen by a US-run headquarters in Qatar. These targets – referred to by David Cameron as “dynamic” – are identified by surveillance aircraft, drones and intelligence and passed to headquarters for a decision.
The HQ then allocates a plane according to which plane is closest and the weaponry being carried. That could be one of two RAF Tornados in the air over Iraq and Syria at the time.
Will British involvement in Syria make a difference? Agence France-Presse has cited a couple of foreign policy specialists, both of who have their doubts.
“It will not make a big operational difference,” said Professor Malcolm Chalmers of military think-tank the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI).
“It is important symbolically, useful operationally, but not transformative.”
There are currently eight Tornado jets based at Akrotiri in Cyprus, but they are likely to be joined shortly by another two, my colleague Ewan MacAskill reports.
Capt Richard Davies, a Tornado pilot and station commander, said on Wednesday the extra jets would allow the RAF to increase sorties from two a day.
How soon could the RAF be in action over Syria, he was asked before the vote by MPs. “If a vote yes, if Tornados flying at that time and if there is a target in Syria, UK bombing could happen overnight… If all those ducks are aligned and the aircraft are airborne at that moment and a target comes up they will go. It depends where they are. If we are airborne in Iraq and the vote is yes, we could be targeting on that mission,” Davies said.
More images from RAF Akrotiri of those four Tornado jets departing the base around two hours ago.
According to the BBC, the four Tornados that left Cyprus in pairs at 03.00 GMT were carrying three 500lb (226kg) Paveway bombs each. Two have returned so far without the weapons.
Reuters is reporting that two of the four Tornado bombers that left RAF Akrotiri base in Cyprus hours after the UK parliament authorised airstrikes in Syria have since returned to the base.
“A strike was made from over Syria,” said a government source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The source declined to give further operational information about the targets or the number of aircraft involved, citing national security.
Here’s our news wrap on this morning’s development:
Britain has carried out its first airstrikes in Syria, hours after MPs voted overwhelmingly to authorise military action.
RAF Tornado jets were seen taking off from the Akrotiri base in Cyprus and the Ministry of Defence later confirmed that they had carried out the “first offensive operation over Syria and have conducted strikes”.
British jets have struck targets in Syria, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed, hours after MPs voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday night to authorise an extension of bombing.
Four RAF Tornado jets were seen taking off from their airbase at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus shortly after the vote. Their destination was not immediately clear but the MoD said in a statement jets had carried out the “first offensive operation over Syria and have conducted strikes”.
Continue reading...