Women, Peace and Security Bill [HL]

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

3rd reading
Friday 13th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

I intervene briefly to repeat what I have said before, which is that the Government support the ethos of this Bill and that our support for the WPS agenda is unwavering, as the noble Baroness knows. I am committed to ensuring that the key principles in the Bill are followed through. We have had a good initial meeting, and I have committed to meeting the APPG. The important thing is how we deliver that agenda, and we are determined to do so. I am grateful to the noble Baroness for putting forward this Bill.

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

As my noble friend Lord Courtown said at Second Reading, we welcome this Bill. I join other noble Lords in congratulating my noble friend Lady Hodgson of Abinger on bringing it forward. His Majesty’s Official Opposition are fully supportive of the principles behind my noble friend’s Bill. It is a testament to the hard work she has relentlessly actioned for in this arena, promoting women’s rights and campaigning for peace and security. This Bill received wide-ranging, cross-party support at Second Reading, notably from the noble Baronesses, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle and Lady Foster of Aghadrumsee, the noble Lord, Lord McConnell of Glenscorrodale, and my noble friends Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Lady Anelay of St Johns. This is an important Bill. We hope that the Government will listen carefully to my noble friend Lady Hodgson as she continues her brilliant work in this focus area.

Bill passed and sent to the Commons.

North-west Syria

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd December 2024 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the opportunity to respond to this Statement. As I am sure many in this House will be aware, the developments in Syria are worrying on two fronts. We have seen an extremist rebel group take land in Aleppo and the first Russian airstrikes there since 2016. The threat to civilians is immense and these actors will only compound the region’s suffering. As the Minister says, there has been more than a decade of turmoil and tragedy for the innocent people of Syria, which is heartbreaking. As the shadow Foreign Secretary said in the other place:

“With the eyes of the world focused on other conflicts, we cannot forget the brutality, the loss of life and the destruction that has taken place in Syria, or its consequences. More than half a million people have already been killed, with millions injured or maimed, with some being victims of chemical weapons”.—[Official Report, Commons, 2/12/24; col. 62.]


As the situation escalates, can the Minister inform the House what conversations have taken place with regional and international partners on the threat that the actions of the extremist rebels and the existing brutal regime poses to our interests? Furthermore, as Syria is the world’s largest source of Captagon, a highly addictive and dangerous illicit substance which has recently been seen in hospitalisations in Europe, what effect does the Minister think these developments will have on its production? Will he also review the security and defence implications and the terrorism risks of these developments?

Your Lordships’ House will know that the UK has been in the vanguard of the humanitarian response, of which we are all extremely proud. The previous Government invested £4 billion in support that has reached millions of people, saving lives with food, shelter, water, medicines, vaccinations and improved sanitation. What plans does the Minister have to ensure aid reaches the right people? Does he know how that aid will be transmitted, allowing those who genuinely work in the voluntary sector access to travel to Syria without being halted by the latest round of sanctions in October?

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I commend the noble Earl for standing in on international affairs issues; he would be very welcome to continue to participate on these issues. I agree with him that the spectre of the conflict that took place a number of years ago is still with us. It was a frozen conflict in many respects, but there was no sustainable peace.

Obviously, the speed of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham’s advance took the Assad regime off guard. That pernicious regime is economically and morally bankrupt, but perhaps there is less surprise that some groups are taking advantage of the duration of the conflict in Gaza. As much as the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has said that he is seeking to defeat Islamic terrorism, al-Qaeda in Syria has made a dramatic move for territory that may well have much wider ramifications across all Syria’s borders, including for Israel, Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan and Iraq. The latter two are still struggling to restore normality after the 2016 freezing of hostilities.

My colleague Calum Miller MP reminded the House of Commons after he spoke with the Jordanian ambassador that there are still 1.3 million Syrian refugees in Jordan. I saw fairly recently the Syrian refugees in Lebanon, who, on a humanitarian basis, have also been victims of the extension of the conflict against Hezbollah. What ministerial discussions are taking place with the Foreign Minister of Jordan on a shared security assessment between the UK and our friends in Amman? Do we plan to have high-level discussions with Turkish officials, given their key involvement with a number of the groups in this part of Syria, not least their contact with HTS?

If we continue to proscribe HTS, as we will, have the Government carried out an assessment of what it represents today? There has been considerable press reporting that HTS has sought to distance itself from our proscription on the grounds that it was simply a different name for al-Qaeda in Syria. Is our assessment of the presence of HTS the same?

It was noticeable that, after the visit by the Foreign Minister of Iran to Damascus to meet Assad, the very next leader to offer him full support was the leader of the UAE. In recent years we have supplied the UAE with over £400 million of arms exports. Given its support of the Assad regime, that it is hard to judge the extent of what may happen next, and the ease with which Russia, Iran and the UAE have offered support to Assad, can the Minister reassure the House that none of the arms we have sold to the UAE will be used in potential conflict in Syria? Given that in certain parts beyond the north-west there is already violence within the Kurdish groups and Turkish interests, there is a real potential that this will spread—which, as the noble Earl said, will compound the humanitarian situation.

Secondly, with regard to the UAE, the UK’s 2020 Syria sanctions regime is still in place. Have we had contact with UAE officials to ensure that they are fully aware that any support they provide to the Assad regime must, from the United Kingdom’s perspective, be consistent with our Syrian sanctions regime?

Finally, given that our principal interest is UK national security, have the Government had discussions with our allies in Washington? With a new Administration in Washington, there is a potential change of policy regarding the force posture of the 1,000 US troops in the region. US officials were at pains to say that they are watching the situation very closely and the US has no position on the recent incursions of HTS. However, the 1,000 troops are part of a combined operation which continues to incarcerate those the UK has considered a potential threat to the UK. At this time of great uncertainty and complexity, national security should be a priority for us all, as it is across all parts of this House. If the Minister could update us on our discussions with the United States regarding their essential force there, that would be extremely beneficial.