Apache helicopters would mark ‘serious escalation’ of Libya conflict – Labour

Shadow defence secretary attacks coalition for keeping public ‘in the dark’ as bipartisan stance on Libya suffers first serious split The deployment of Apache attack helicopters to Libya represents a “serious escalation” of the conflict, the shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy, has warned. In the first major breach in the bipartisan approach to the bombing campaign, Murphy attacked the government for keeping the public and parliament in the dark about the deployment of the helicopters. Other MPs warned of “mission creep” and said the deployment showed that the NATO operation is now seeking to overthrow the Gaddafi regime rather than simply to protect civilians in Libya. Nick Harvey, the Liberal Democrat armed forces minister, was summoned to parliament to answer questions after the Guardian reported that Britain and France are to deploy the helicopters against Libya in an attempt to break the stalemate. Liam Fox, the defence secretary, is on an official visit to Washington. Harvey told MPs that Britain had not decided whether to deploy the helicopters. But a source from the Ministry of Defence said: “The chances are it is going to happen.” Murphy rounded on the government after Gérard Longuet, the French defence minister, said France would deploy 12 helicopters. Le Figaro quoted Longuet as saying that Britain would make a similar commitment and that Britain’s thinking was “the sooner the better”. The shadow defence secretary said: “The British people will desperately be concerned that French ministers seem to know about the deployment of British military equipment [sooner] than the British parliament. “Parliament hasn’t written the government a blank cheque on Libya. Ministers should never keep the British public in the dark on major deployments. This is a serious moment. It would be a serious escalation if such a commitment were to be made. Parliament should not and should never be kept in the dark.” Harvey insisted no decision has been made. “For the avoidance of all doubt, no such decision has been taken by the UK,” he said. “It is an option we are considering. No decision has been taken and there is absolutely no sense in which it is not true to say that we have kept parliament in the dark about a decision we have taken.” The armed forces minister said deploying the helicopters would not mark an escalation in the conflict. “I do not accept that if we were to take a decision at some point to use attack helicopters that that would be an escalation of what we are doing in Libya,” he said. “The targets would remain the same. It would simply be a tactical shift in what assets we use to try and hit those targets.” But Harvey said that deploying Apache helicopters would have major advantages. “The principal advantage it would give us over what we are doing at the moment would be the ability to strike moving targets with greater precision than we are able to, using the air assets we are currently deploying.” Others MPs warned that the NATO mission was now designed to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi. David Winnick, the Labour MP for Walsall North, said: “Despite denials, UN security council resolution 1973 is in fact being used for regime change. Regime change is totally outside international law.” John Barron, the Conservative MP for Basildon and Billericay, said: “Whether or not we deploy Apache helicopters, the fact that a key NATO ally has represents a significant escalation in this conflict and reinforces the point that regime change has been the aim of our intervention.” Dennis Skinner, the Labour MP for Bolsover, said: “Hasn’t this intervention been subject to mission creep ever since it began? The statements that have been made in this house have indicated that – a little bit of help here, special forces there, further intervention. “Now the French, who initiated this intervention in the first place because of an election in France next year – there is no surprise to me that they are now telling the British government what the next phase is.” Chris Bryant, Labour’s former Europe minister, warned of a stalemate. He said: “The trouble is that if the government’s aim is not regime change then it is basically stalemate. How long is that stalemate going to go on?” Bernard Jenkin, the former Tory shadow defence secretary, issued a similar warning. “We either have to break the stalemate or broker a peace,” he said. Other MPs were supportive. Nicholas Soames, the former Tory defence minister, said: “The deployment, were it to happen, of the Apache would be entirely appropriate given particularly the change in tactics of the Gaddafi forces. [There is] the requirement to have a highly effective machine that is able to deal with the hard-to-find targets.” Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Lib Dem leader, said: “Were Apache helicopters to be deployed, which, after all, carry missiles, what would the difference in principle be between that and the use of fast jets carrying missiles?” Foreign policy Liberal-Conservative coalition Jim Murphy Labour Military Libya Middle East Africa Hélène Mulholland guardian.co.uk

Posted by on May 24, 2011. Filed under News, Politics, World News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.