David Cameron has promised a "comprehensive strategy" to win MPs' backing for bombing Islamic State militants in Syria as well as Iraq.
The prime minister told the Commons the Paris attacks had strengthened the case for air strikes, suggesting there could be a fresh vote on the issue.
He wanted to "do the right thing for our country", and hit the "head of the snake" of IS in Raqqa, Syria, he said.
MPs rejected strikes against Syrian government forces in a 2013 vote.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said any military response should have the support of the international community and legality from the United Nations.
'Growing threat'
Two years ago, MPs voted against possible UK military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government to deter the use of chemical weapons.
Parliament later approved British participation in air strikes against Islamic State extremists in Iraq, which have been ongoing ever since.
Mr Cameron promised action against IS would not be extended to Syria without Parliament's consent - and said he would only hold another vote when he was sure of a "consensus" among MPs.
Downing Street has stressed it is not setting out a timetable publicly for a Commons vote yet, says BBC political correspondent Chris Mason.
An "important first step" would be setting out his case in a personal response to a recent Foreign Affairs Committee report, the prime minister said - with sources indicating this would be done before the end of the month.
Addressing the Commons on Tuesday, Mr Cameron said that British planes had attacked 350 targets in Iraq and offered support to their allies' action over Syria.
But he said Islamic State - also known as Isis, Isil or Daesh - did not recognise or respect the border between the two countries.
"It is in Syria, in Raqqa, that Isil has its headquarters and it is from Raqqa that some of the main threats against this country are planned and orchestrated," he said.
Analysis
Cpl Neil Bryden/RAF/MoD Crown CopyrightBy BBC political editor Laura Keunssberg
David Cameron is pushing this right back up the agenda after months where the parliamentary arithmetic was not certain enough for him to risk a humiliating defeat.
It still is not.
The anti-action position of the Labour leadership makes another vote far from a forgone conclusion.
There is deep concern about taking action unless it's part of wider efforts to bring peace to Syria.
That's why the prime minister has not committed to holding a vote asking for backing for air strikes yet, but instead is committing to remake the case more firmly and more comprehensively to try once more to persuade MPs.
Mr Cameron said: "Raqqa, if you like, is the head of the snake. Over Syria we are supporting our allies - the US, France, Jordan and the Gulf countries - with intelligence, with surveillance and with refuelling. But I believe, as I have said many times before, we should be doing more.
"We face a direct and growing threat to our country and we need to deal with it not just in Iraq but in Syria too."
He said Britain could not protect its people "by sitting back and wishing things were different", or letting other countries "carry the burden".
Mr Cameron's speech came after IS said it was behind Friday's attacks in which 129 people were killed in bars, restaurants, a concert hall and at a stadium in Paris. The victims included Briton Nick Alexander from Essex.
David Cameron told the Commons he would be setting out a "full spectrum" approach, which would include military action, counter-terrorism, humanitarian support and strategies for "defeating the poisonous narrative of extremism".
Responding to the prime minister's statement, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said nothing could ever justify the targeting of civilians but warned that any response should not feed a cycle of violence and hatred.
He told Mr Cameron: "Can I therefore welcome your comments at the G20 yesterday when you said, 'I think people want to know there is a whole plan for the future of Syria, for the future of our region and it's perfectly right to say a few bombs and missiles won't transform the situation.'"
BBC assistant political editor Norman Smith said many Labour MPs were unhappy with Mr Corbyn's indication that he would oppose almost any military intervention.
Downing Street could be hoping to capitalise on disarray in Labour circles on the issue and win the support of many Labour MPs in any future vote, he added.
Among other recent developments:
- Mr Cameron confirmed he would attend the football match between England and France at Wembley Stadium later, where armed police are being deployed. Prince William and London Mayor Boris Johnson are also expected to attend
- Chancellor George Osborne announced a doubling of funds to fight cybercrime to £1.9bn over five years, warning that Islamic State hoped to launch cyber-attacks on UK targets
- RAF Tornados had attacked a group of more than 30 IS fighters in Iraq on Monday, and an RAF Reaper drone had provided surveillance for a French air strike on an IS target in Syria on Sunday, the MoD said
- Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe says he has increased the number of armed response vehicles in London by a third, with a "full team" ready to respond 24 hours a day
- Mr Corbyn says he supports any "strictly necessary force" needed to protect the UK in a terrorist attack following criticism of his opposition to a "shoot-to-kill" policy
Labour MP Mike Gapes, a former chairman of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, said he agreed with the prime minister, and that it was illogical not to attack IS in Syria.
"It's like in World War Two, bombing Hamburg, but not attacking Berlin," he said.
However, there was opposition from some SNP and Liberal Democrats MPs.
Alex Salmond, the SNP's foreign affairs spokesman, said the government had not yet made a convincing case that British military intervention in Syria would make "any material difference".
He said a UN mandate would be a condition for the SNP's support in any vote.
Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron warned against being dragged into another Iraq-style war, saying that any action needed to be effective rather than a "knee-jerk" reaction.
No comments:
Post a Comment