Abstract
This chapter examines the Coalition’s case for humanitarian intervention in Libya (2011) and Syria (2013). It shows that, in both parliamentary debates, Cameron and Clegg employed identification through antithesis to distinguish their approach from the 2003 Iraq war. Buttressing this strategy were appeals for ideological and instrumental identification, which, respectively, were founded on the principle of humanitarian intervention and conceptions of the ‘national interest’. While MPs overwhelmingly supported the mission in Libya, they refused to back military action against Syria. Here, the Coalition’s case for intervention resembled that of Blair in several important respects, notably the bypassing of the UN. This prevented the partners from creating a clear contrast between Iraq and Syria, and so undermined their efforts to foster identification through antithesis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See, for instance, the website http://www.arrestblair.org and the Channel 4 drama The Trial of Tony Blair (2007).
- 2.
For the full text of the Government’s note on the legal basis for intervention in Libya, see BBC (2011).
- 3.
In his opening statement, Cameron argued that: ‘This action was necessary because, with others, we should be trying to prevent this dictator from using military violence against his own people; it was legal because … it had the backing of the UN Security Council ; and it was right … because we should not stand aside while he murders his own people—and the Arab League and many others agreed’ (HC Deb., 21 March 2011, vol. 524 col. 704).
- 4.
Likewise, William Hague said: ‘The Arab world and the Western world care about the civilians of Libya, but their Government do not. We are determined to stop violence, bloodshed and suffering—the very things that the Gaddafi regime is happy to unleash’ (HC Deb., 21 March 2011, vol. 524 col. 801).
- 5.
- 6.
Likewise, the Conservative MP John Baron asked: ‘Is military intervention without a UN resolution legitimate? International law is terribly subjective—there are no hard and fast rules, but the best we have is the UN’ (HC Deb., 29 August 2013, vol. 566 col. 1496). Meanwhile, Lorely Burt (Liberal Democrat) contended that: ‘In order to ensure that we act with maximum legitimacy, we must have transparent international law on our side and make sure that the actions that we take have wide international approval’ (HC Deb., 29 August 2013, vol. 566 col. 1500).
- 7.
As James Strong points out, ‘just 22 per cent of opinion poll respondents favoured British intervention’ in Syria (2015: 1133).
- 8.
Echoing this point, Ottaway explained that, in 2003, ‘Parliament was briefed on the intelligence, but we were given only part of the story and, in some cases, an inaccurate story. A summary of the intelligence [on Syria] has been published, but it is the bare bones’ (HC Deb., 29 August 2013, vol. 566 col. 1460).
References
Atkins, J. (2006). A New Approach to Humanitarian Intervention? Tony Blair’s ‘Doctrine of the International Community’. British Politics, 1(2), 274–283.
Atkins, J. (2011). Justifying New Labour Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
BBC. (2011, March 21). In Full: UK Government’s Legal Note on Libya. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12810050
Beech, M., & Oliver, T. J. (2014). Humanitarian Intervention and Foreign Policy in the Conservative-Led Coalition. Parliamentary Affairs, 67(1), 102–118.
Blair, T. (1999, April 24). Doctrine of the International Community. Retrieved from http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=279
Cameron, D. (2013, August 27). Syria: Transcript of PM’s Interview. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/syria-transcript-of-pms-interview
Cheney, G. (1983). The Rhetoric of Identification and the Study of Organizational Communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69(2), 143–158.
Clarke, M. (2015). The Coalition and Foreign Affairs. In A. Seldon & M. Finn (Eds.), The Coalition Effect 2010–2015 (pp. 345–369). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clegg, N. (2011a, March 29). An Axis of Openness: Renewing Multilateralism for the 21st Century. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/an-axis-of-openness-renewing-multilateralism-for-the-21st-century
Clegg, N. (2011b, August 22). Arab Spring Speech. Retrieved from http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2011/08/22/nick-clegg-arab-spring-speech-in-fulll
Clegg, N. (2013a, August 27). Syria: Transcript of Nick Clegg’s Interview. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/syria-transcript-of-nick-cleggs-interview
Clegg, N. (2013b, August 28). ‘This Is Not Iraq’: Nick Clegg’s Email to Party Members on Syria. Retrieved from https://www.markpack.org.uk/45141/this-is-not-iraq-nick-cleggs-email-to-party-members-on-syria/
Daddow, O. (2013). The Use of Force in British Foreign Policy: From New Labour to the Coalition. The Political Quarterly, 84(1), 110–118.
Daddow, O., & Schnapper, P. (2013). Liberal Intervention in the Foreign Policy Thinking of Tony Blair and David Cameron. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 26(2), 330–349.
d’Ancona, M. (2013). In It Together: The Inside Story of the Coalition Government. London: Viking.
Hague, W. (2011a, March 22). A Turning Point for Africa? Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/a-turning-point-for-africa
Hague, W. (2011b, May 4). We Will Continue to Fight Against Terrorism Wherever It Rears Its Head. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/we-will-continue-to-fight-against-terrorism-wherever-it-rears-its-head
Hajer, M. A. (1997). The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hamre, J., Barton, F., Crocker, B., Mendelson-Forman, J., and Orr, R. (2003, July 17). Iraq’s Post-Conflict Reconstruction: A Field Review and Recommendations. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Iraq_Trip_Report.pdf
Hardman, I. (2013, August 29). Syria Defeat: What Happened to the Whips? The Spectator. Retrieved from https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2013/08/syria-defeat-what-happened-to-the-whips/
HC Deb., 21 March 2011, vol. 524 cols. 704–801.
HC Deb., 29 August 2013, vol. 566 cols. 1427–1521.
Kaarbo, J., & Kenealy, D. (2016). No, Prime Minister: Explaining the House of Commons’ Vote on Intervention in Syria. European Security, 25(1), 28–48.
Laws, D. (2016). Coalition: The Inside Story of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Government. London: Biteback Publishing Ltd.
Oliver, T. J. (2015). Intervention by Design or Failure: The Coalition and Humanitarian Intervention. The Political Quarterly, 86(1), 110–117.
Ralph, J. (2011). After Chilcot: The ‘Doctrine of International Community’ and the UK Decision to Invade Iraq. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 13(3), 304–325.
Seldon, A., & Snowdon, P. (2015). Cameron at 10: The Inside Story 2010–2015. London: William Collins.
Strong, J. (2015). Interpreting the Syria Vote: Parliament and British Foreign Policy. International Affairs, 91(5), 1123–1139.
Vickers, R. (2015). Foreign Policy and International Development. In M. Beech & S. Lee (Eds.), The Conservative-Liberal Coalition: Examining the Cameron-Clegg Government (pp. 227–242). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Atkins, J. (2018). Foreign Policy. In: Conflict, Co-operation and the Rhetoric of Coalition Government. Rhetoric, Politics and Society. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-31796-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-31796-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-230-35967-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-31796-4
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)