PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Syria - 9 December 2024 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on Syria. Over less than a fortnight there has been an extraordinary change. What began as an opposition offensive in north-western Syria quickly became a headlong retreat by pro-Assad forces and, over the weekend, the fall of his murderous regime. On 30 November, the regime withdrew from Aleppo; on 5 December, Hama; on 6 December, Daraa and Homs; and on 7 December, Damascus.

As this Government came into office, some in the international community and some in this House asked whether we would re-engage with Assad. His Russian and Iranian allies have long championed him, last year he returned to the Arab League, and increasingly other Governments were also starting to step up their presence in Damascus. This Government choose not to re-engage. We said no because Assad is a monster. We said no because Assad was a dictator whose sole interest was his wealth and his power. We said no because Assad is a criminal who defied all laws and norms to use chemical weapons against the Syrian people. We said no because Assad is a butcher with the blood of countless innocents on his hands. We said no because Assad was a drug dealer, funding his regime through Captagon and illicit finance, and we said no because he was never ever going to change.

There were those who used to call Assad “the lion of Damascus.” Now we see the reality: Assad is the rat of Damascus, fleeing to Moscow with his tail between his legs. How fitting he should end up there. We see streets of Syrians cheering his demise, tearing down his statutes and re-uniting with loved ones who had been disappeared. We have long hoped to see him gone and welcome the opportunity this brings for the people of Syria.

Assad’s demise is not just a humiliation for him and his henchman; it is a humiliation for Russia and Iran. Iran’s so-called axis of resistance is crumbling before our eyes and all Vladimir Putin has got from his attempt to prop up Assad for more than a decade is a fallen dictator filing for asylum in Moscow. He says he wants to return Russia to its imperial glory, but after more than 1,000 days he has not subjugated Ukraine. Putin’s fake empire stops short just a few miles outside Donetsk. I have no fear of it, only disgust.

Of course, our revulsion at Assad, his henchmen and those who propped him up must not blind us to the risks of this moment. Assad’s demise brings no guarantee of peace. This is a moment of danger as well as opportunity for Syrians and for the region. The humanitarian situation in Syria is dire, with almost 17 million people in need. Millions are refugees still, largely in neighbouring Türkiye, Lebanon and Jordan. Seeing so many start to return to Syria is a positive sign of their hopes for a better future now that Assad is gone, but a lot depends on what happens now. This flow into Syria could quickly become a flow back out, which would potentially increase the numbers using dangerous, illegal migration routes to continental Europe and the United Kingdom.

Syria has proven to be a hotbed of extremism. The House will know that the group whose offensive first pushed back the regime, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham—or HTS, as it is now being called—are a proscribed terrorist organisation in the UK as an alias of al-Qaeda. That should rightly make us cautious. Thus far, HTS have offered reassurances to minorities in Aleppo, Hama and Damascus. They have also committed to co-operating with the international community over monitoring chemical weapons. We will judge HTS by their actions, monitoring closely how they and other parties to this conflict treat all civilians in areas they control.

The UK and our allies have spent over a decade combating terrorism in Syria. Daesh remains one of the most significant terrorist threats to the UK, our allies and our interests overseas. We take seriously our duty as a Government to protect the public from this and other terrorist threats.

Amid this uncertainty, the Government have three priorities, first and foremost of which is protecting all civilians, including, of course, minorities. For more than a decade, Syria has been racked by terrible sectarian violence. We continue to do what we can to provide humanitarian support wherever we can. The UK has spent over £4 billion on the Syrian crisis to date. UK-funded mobile medical units already provide emergency services across northern Syria. Last week, we gave a further £300,000 to the White Helmets and today the Prime Minister has announced an additional £11 million of humanitarian support for Syrians.

The second priority is securing an inclusive, negotiated political settlement, as I discussed with the UN special envoy for Syria, Geir Pedersen, yesterday. This is how the Syrian people can begin to chart a path to a united and peaceful Syria.

The final priority is preventing escalation into the wider region. For more than a year, the middle east has been in the grip of a series of interlocking conflicts, which threatened to become an even more catastrophic war; and in Syria itself, Russia and Iran have kept Assad’s regime on life support. If we are to achieve a better future for Syrians, we should let Syrians themselves determine their future.

We must learn another lesson from this crisis, too. Illicit finance was a fundamental part of Assad’s playbook, and it is part of Putin’s playbook and the playbook of dictators and criminals around the world. This hurts ordinary people in our own country and people in Syria. It drives up crime and drives up house prices here in the UK. That is why today I am announcing £36 million in new funding for the National Crime Agency on anti-corruption, a new anti-corruption champion in Margaret Hodge and new sanctions on those using the illicit gold trade. Previous Governments have neglected that fight; for this Government, it is a mission-critical issue.

With events moving so quickly, the Government have been taking every available opportunity to underline our priorities. Today, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister is in the region visiting the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Over the weekend, I have discussed the situation with my Turkish, Israeli, Emirati and Jordanian counterparts, as well as the UN envoy. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), has also just come back from the region, having attended the Doha forum and the Manama dialogue. Whatever the coming days bring, I reassure the House that our intense diplomatic engagement will continue.

Assad’s victims can be found all over the world. Many have found sanctuary here in the UK over the years, including film-maker Waad al-Kateab. As she said,

“we have hope to get our country back”.

The UK stands by Syrians like Waad and by Assad’s victims across the world. In the face of uncertainty and new dangers, we will secure the UK against terrorism and illegal migration, while helping Syrians to achieve a better future. I commend this statement to the House.

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for his statement. The Conservative Government called for President Assad to go more than a decade ago, and few will shed any tears at this vile tyrant’s removal from office. He bears responsibility for countless deaths, the torture of his opponents, the use of chemical weapons and repression on a horrendous scale. Half a million people have died as a result of his abhorrent actions and this conflict. We all remember the shocking images, day after day, of the barbaric impact of this conflict, and the debates in this House, including the indecision of the west in responding to chemical weapon attacks, which should weigh heavily on our conscience.

While Assad may have sought sanctuary in Russia, we look to the Foreign Secretary to explain what steps will be taken to gather evidence of the crimes his reprehensible regime is responsible for and the actions being taken to bring him to face justice. In view of the situation in Syria, what is the Government’s assessment of the implications for the Syrian resettlement programme? Can he confirm that despite Assad fleeing to Russia to claim asylum, there will be no asylum claims from former members of the Assad regime in this country, many of whom will be associated with human rights abuses?

As the Foreign Secretary said, what happens next is critically important for the civilians of Syria, who have endured so much trauma and tragedy, and for the wider region. Syrians need to be protected by those now controlling territory. That means the protection of all communities, groups and minorities. The House must speak with one voice on that, and some will ask what the UK can do and what we should or should not do. There are no easy answers in the days ahead, but it is profoundly in our national interest that we take whatever action we can, including with our partners, to counter any further instability in Syria.

Like Ministers, I was in the region this weekend discussing the situation with some of our key and crucial partners. Given the large porous borders, violence, insurgency and flow of weapons in the region, can the Foreign Secretary give details of the work being undertaken to strengthen and secure the borders of neighbouring countries? There is a significant risk of a power vacuum in Syria, which could lead to a breakdown of law and order and a proliferation of criminal activities, including the smuggling of weapons and drug production on an industrial scale. Will the Foreign Secretary give an update on the actions being taken to monitor and respond to those criminal activities? Will he also comment on the risk to our security from foreign terrorist fighters being freed from prisons? Will he give his assessment of the risk of the state’s weapons, including potential chemical weapons, falling into the control of those who would cause us harm and threaten our security?

Instability can fuel a rise in extremism, and not only in Syria. There is a risk that ISIS will seek to exploit the present situation; this is also an issue at home. Will the Foreign Secretary inform us whether a cross-Government review of security and defence implications, including terrorism risks, is under way? To what level can he share—I appreciate that he might not be able to do so fully in the House—what discussions are under way with our intelligence partners to counter extremists and security threats from the region?

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham’s historical links to al-Qaeda and their ideology are well known, so they have been proscribed for good reason. Will the Foreign Secretary give a timetable for the reported review of HTS and share the details of the legal mechanism that he will use for that review? Will he give assurances that the Government, with their partners, will be considering the potential threat that HTS pose immediately both to Syria and the region, as well as to our own interests? Security should always be the No. 1 consideration for us all, and we should not forget where this group originally came from. We need to be looking not just at their words but at their actions.

For years, the Assad regime was bailed out by the Russians, the Iranians and Hezbollah, but with Russia now focused on its illegal invasion in Ukraine and with Iran’s presence in the region depleted, will the Foreign Secretary give the Government’s assessment of how this change in Syria will affect the dynamics in the time ahead? What is the strategy for dealing with Iran, which still wants a foothold in Syria to exploit and funnel the misery that we have seen for too long? While we must work towards a better future for Syria, I hope that the Foreign Secretary will agree that the Government must remain alert and prepared for the risks and threats that could still emerge.

I thank the shadow Foreign Secretary for her remarks. Last week, she was in touch with her concerns about what was taking place, and we were able to correspond. I am grateful for the manner in which we have been able to engage on this very serious issue.

The shadow Foreign Secretary rightly raised the terrible human rights records of Russia and Iran in backing this grim, brutal regime. She is absolutely right that they should be held to account for their actions. She will know that we do not have a diplomatic presence in Syria at this time, and indeed the Syrians do not have a diplomatic presence here in the UK, so recording these actions is not straightforward. However, as she would expect, we continue to work with non-governmental organisations and civil society to support them in their efforts. We will see over the coming days and weeks how they can both record and hold to account those who kept Syria under this brutal regime not just for the last 13 years, but in the years before that under the regime of Assad’s father.

The shadow Foreign Secretary raised Syrian resettlement. Let me say that that is premature. The House has sought on a cross-party basis to support the humanitarian needs of Syrians; indeed, she would have seen that in her previous role in government. We recognise the displacement next door in Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq and neighbouring countries, and we will continue to support people in those refugee camps and through the humanitarian aid that we support in-country at this time.

The shadow Foreign Secretary raised the tremendous issues on the ground. We are all rightly concerned about increased terrorism that might engulf the country, which has different sections, communities, minorities and regions—not just HTS, as has been reported in the papers. Against that backdrop, a Cobra has been convened to fully understand these issues across Government. It would not be right to comment on intelligence matters at this time, but she will understand that the Government are active, as she would expect us to be.

The shadow Foreign Secretary is right about the threat not just of terrorism but of illicit drugs. Having just come back from the region, I am sure that she will have heard Gulf allies raise the issue of Captagon and illegal drugs that also propped up Assad’s regime and flooded into Gulf countries. We continue to monitor that. None of us wants Syria to become like Libya next door—fractured and vulnerable to different terrorist groups. We will do all we can. That is why I spoke to the UN envoy yesterday—I will continue to stay in close dialogue with him—and to Jordan, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and others. The UK will do all it can to support this new representative process that has the people of Syria at its heart. We want the jubilation to continue, and not be replaced by another bloody and brutal regime.

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Across the House we all celebrate the end of this terrible regime, but the very last thing that the Syrian people want, as my right hon. Friend said, is for one tyrant to be replaced by another, but with an Islamic flag. There is another way, but it will not be easy.

I am glad to hear that my right hon. Friend has begun talking to the UN special representative, because Syrians have been working on other plans—other constitutions and laws—over a long period, under the auspices of the United Nations. What is desperately needed now is to ensure that inclusive transitional arrangements are put in place that can take Syria into a brighter world, with the political system that the long-suffering Syrian people need and deserve, to give them an extraordinary, multi-ethnic, multi-background country. I hope that that is our priority and that we do not simply step back and say, “Oh well, what can we do?”

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have to ensure that Druze, Alawites, Christians, as well as Sunni and Shi’a Muslims and Kurds, have a place in this vast, ancient and important country, and that civilian life is protected. That is why the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer) spoke to representatives of civil society just yesterday, and why I was discussing what happens now. For example, Iran supplied the oil to Syria. Who will supply that oil now? We must find ways in which public officials in Syria can be paid so that they can do that job. Over the coming hours we desperately need to get policing back in Syria, so that there is not widespread disorder. For all of those reasons, my right hon. Friend is right that we must work with civil society and local partners.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for early sight of his statement. The fall of the Assad regime is momentous for the millions of Syrians who have suffered under his brutal rule. The al-Assad dynasty were despots, who used chemical weapons against their own people. The images emerging today from Saydnaya prison illustrate the lengths that the regime took to murder, torture and silence its opponents. What steps are being taken to ensure that both Bashar and his brother Maher al-Assad face justice for the crimes that they have committed?

These developments create immediate strategic challenges for the UK. Will the Foreign Secretary assure the House that the UK is taking urgent action with our allies to identify, locate and secure the stockpiles of chemical weapons in Syria? What assessment can he offer of how this change will impact Russian military capabilities, particularly in respect of its bases at Latakia and Tartus?

There is joy for many liberated Syrians today. This has been a national process of liberation—it is not that of just one group. The international community must learn the lessons of other regime changes and seek to support a process of reconciliation and transition that is led by the Syrian people, and not imposed from outside. Will the Foreign Secretary say in a little more detail how the UK will support an inclusive national process that leads to a fresh constitution, and, in due course, free and fair elections? Will he reassure the House that any recognition of a new Government in Syria will depend on sustained evidence that political, minority and human rights are being protected?

The Foreign Secretary is right that the displacement of civilians from Syria under Assad has deepened the need for humanitarian support in the region. He mentions £11 million in emergency funding, but the drop in humanitarian and other aid to Syria from the UK from 2016 to 2022 was £289 million. Does he therefore agree that there is an urgent need to restore the UK’s aid budget to help displaced people in their home countries, so they have less need to flee overseas?

Assad has fallen. We should act swiftly to support the UK’s strategic interests in the region, and we must do all we can to ensure that what rises in his place represents all the Syrians who yearn to live peacefully, side by side with their neighbours.

The hon. Gentleman is right to say that Russia and Iran must be held to account for the way they propped up this regime and supported a man who used chemical weapons on his own population. I hope the hon. Gentleman welcomes the further sanctions that I announced, and the appointment of Baroness Hodge to lead across Government on issues of illicit finance. We will, of course, work with others, including the French, on the actions they have brought.

The hon. Gentleman raises, importantly, the issue of stockpiles of chemical weapons. He will have seen that Julani has been clear that he will not use chemical weapons, and that he will work with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons on that issue, and we will monitor that very closely. Any use of chemical weapons would be grievous, and the international community would have to come together to do all we could to support the Syrian people.

The hon. Gentleman also asks what more can we do. At this point in time, the important thing is to work with the key countries in the region, particularly neighbours and Arab partners, and work closely with our E3 partners and the current and incoming US Governments. That is the key combination to doing all we can to support Syria at this time.

I mentioned the real concerns about disorder and energy supply and oil, and how we support the public sector to move forward in the appropriate manner, ensuring they are paid so that people can do their job. The hon. Gentleman raises the point about aid, and I think we should reflect on something: were the British people and this Parliament, and Parliaments before it, not united in supporting Syria with a record amount of sums—more than any other country in the world—just imagine where Syria would be today, notwithstanding the number of displaced peoples and the challenges that currently exist.

I call the Chair of the International Development Committee.

Since 28 November, almost a million Syrians, most of them women and children, have been displaced internally due to the recent violence. More than 7.2 million Syrians are internally displaced and around 6.2 million are long-term refugees, mostly in neighbouring countries. The Foreign Secretary is right to say that Assad’s fall could allow millions of refugees to finally return home, but what comes next could also escalate the country’s displacement crisis. Will he tell us more about what steps he is taking with our partners on the worst-case scenario, and will he commit to continuing, and indeed increasing, our support for host refugee countries, for example, Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon?

My hon. Friend raises these issues with tremendous experience. She will know that Syria faces the highest number of displaced people internally, and that results in various pressures. Of course, if chaos or further violence were to ensue over the coming days, there would be further displacement within the country. She rightly raises the issues for neighbouring countries, all of which have been very keen to speak to me and this Government about the pressures that they would face from further displacement. I reassure her that I have discussed that, particularly with Turkey and Jordan at this time, and they want to work with us to make what is coming in Syria work as best it can for the local population.

I reassure the right hon. Gentleman that, of course, we are talking to the American Administration. I know that when he was Foreign Secretary, he tried to move quickly, but announcing within 24 hours that we are reopening an embassy in Syria would be hasty. The pressing issue at this time is humanitarian aid and working with partners on the issues around energy and order that all are raising with us. We will continue to reflect on our ongoing diplomatic relations with Syria. He will recognise, too, from his time in office, that we have particular concerns about the north-eastern corridor in Syria and real concerns relating to counter-terrorism and Daesh, which is of course No. 1 in the UK’s considerations.

I welcome everything in the Foreign Secretary’s statement, and he is right that we must not be blind to the risks of this moment. I want to ask him about two groups. First, what is his hope in the future process for the millions of Syrians who have fled Syria over the past decades? Also, the Kurdish community is one of the largest ethnic communities without a state, and I wonder what hope he has of engaging them in this process for the future.

My hon. Friend is right to raise the displaced people, many of whom are beginning that journey back home. The important thing is that they go home to a country that continues to fuel the hope in their hearts and that can cope with the new increased population that will no doubt demand public services.

My hon. Friend raised the subject of the Kurdish minority group who are also in the country. As I have said, and as the United Nations envoy has said, it has to be an inclusive country with a place for everyone. However, my hon. Friend will recognise that in that north-eastern corridor we work with all partners, but keep a careful eye on anything that comes anywhere close to terrorism.

Does the Foreign Secretary agree that we should not be surprised that one war criminal, President Putin, is now sheltering another, Assad? He will be aware that substantial assets owned by Assad or those linked to him are frozen in this country. Will he consider, in due course, whether we might use those for the benefit of the people of Syria?

Yes, absolutely. The right hon. Gentleman is right. We look at some of the horrors in the world—Syria, of course, but also Sudan, not far away, and Ukraine—and we see behind them the hand of Putin. That is why we must do all that we can to hold him to account for the tyranny that he is raining across the world.

A few days ago I met Sawsan Abou Zainedin of Madaniya, a Syrian non-governmental organisation. She speaks powerfully of the shared responsibility of Syrians to build an inclusive state governed by law and citizenship. As they do that, will the Foreign Secretary commit himself to increasing UK support for Syrian civil society? Will he also increase support for human rights experts, including the UN, as they document the horrific crimes that have been committed against Syrian civilians and work to bring to justice those responsible?

The £11 million that I announced earlier does, of course, include further support for civil society, which is vital at this time.

Today my thoughts are with Bashar Helmi and Mounzer Darsani and their families, and with all the other Syrian refugees who escaped Assad’s brutality and resettled on the Isle of Bute. Their hope, and the hope of all the people of Syria, will be that Syrians are now able to secure the peaceful future that they want, rather than Syria becoming a battlefield in another’s proxy war. How would the Foreign Secretary explain and legally justify the fact that the Syrians whom he mentioned, who were on the street cheering the demise of Assad, having waited five decades to be free of him, were, on day one, on the receiving end of a massive Israeli airstrike?

I spoke to my Israeli counterpart yesterday, and it is right to understand that there are legitimate security concerns for Israel, particularly in the context of a country that has housed ISIS, Daesh, and al-Qaeda. I wish it were as simple as the hon. Gentleman seems to think it is. For all the reasons that I have given, we want an exclusive society that supports everyone, but none of us can have any truck with terrorist groups.

On the demise of Assad’s regime in Syria, my thoughts are with the Syrian people, who have been left to pick up the pieces after his barbaric actions, including his use of chemical weapons. No doubt, having propped up his brutal rule for more than a decade, both Putin and the Iranian leadership are now nursing their bloody noses.

Peace and stability will be foremost in everyone’s mind, and I understand that the Government are urgently reviewing the lifting of the terrorism proscription of Syrian rebel groups, but surely there must be an undertaking beforehand that the rights of women and minorities will be secured. Following the recent reports of Israeli strikes against chemical weapons depots in Syria, what measures are being taken, in collaboration with our international partners, to ensure that those are made secure and do not cause harm to civilians?

I am grateful to the Chair of the Defence Committee. He is right to mention the importance of women, and I reassure him that the funds that we are making available will absolutely support women. He mentions proscription. The situation on the ground in Syria is very fluid. Our priority at this time is the safety of Syrian civilians, but let me be absolutely clear: we do not comment on proscription, for good reason, but we should recognise that al-Qaeda has killed hundreds of British citizens in barbaric attacks spanning decades. That was the original reason why HTS were proscribed.

I have never regretted my vote in favour of military action in 2013, and I certainly welcome the fact that President Assad has been brought down. I welcome what the Foreign Secretary has to say on humanitarian aid, but there are myriad UN Security Council resolutions in place on humanitarian aid, and on rebuilding Syria in all its forms. What role does the Foreign Secretary see the UN—and indeed those Security Council resolutions—playing?

The right hon. Gentleman is right to mention the importance of the UN, and resolution 2254 is particularly relevant to Syria. If he reviews that resolution, he will see that it largely assumes that the Assad regime is in place, so it is important to support the UN special representative at this time. If Syria is to succeed, there must be a greater role for the UN, and I intend to discuss these issues with the Secretary-General and others in the coming days and weeks.

I share the delight of my Syrian friends that Assad has gone. I only wish that the world had acted to support the Syrian people sooner, and that our dear friend Jo Cox was around to see this. I pay tribute to the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), for meeting the Syrian British Consortium in Doha over the weekend, and I look forward to a further meeting with him and the group in due course.

Despite the denial and downplaying of Assad’s crimes over the years, including by some Members of this House, it is undeniable that hundreds of thousands of people have been imprisoned by Assad, including in Saydnaya prison. There is an urgent need to release those prisoners. Some of them are several storeys down, and there are reports on the ground that people are unable to free them at the moment, such are the electronic locks that have been put on the gates. The White Helmets are on the ground, trying to unlock the gates so that people can be freed, but there is a real worry that they will not get to them in time, and that people will starve, or even run out of oxygen. What can the British Government and the international community do to ensure that, in the next 24 hours, more is done to get technical support on the ground, so that we can unlock the doors and free the political prisoners?

My hon. Friend raises a really important issue. So grim was the Assad regime that I saw a young child—a toddler, effectively—walking out of a prison. This issue has commanded a lot of attention in the last few hours. We will continue to support civil society and public services as best we can in getting individuals out, but he will recognise that that is against a backdrop of some constraints. We do not have a diplomatic presence in Syria—we have not had one for a very long time. He mentions prisoners; we should never forget the 100,000 or more people who have simply disappeared. We hope and pray that many of those people will come out from underground.

May I gently remind the House that one should never idealise the oppositions in these scenarios? Some of what I have heard today reminds me very much of what I heard in this House after the downfall of Saddam Hussein and of Muammar Gaddafi. The truth is that in Syria, it is a choice between monsters and maniacs. I do not regret my votes either, in 2013 and 2015, when the coalition wanted to bomb first one side and then the other in the same civil war. Can the Foreign Secretary throw some light on what he expects Turkey to do, having supported the Islamist opposition, now that it will be face to face with its Kurdish enemies?

The Chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee is right—

Ex-Chair.

Forgive me. The ex-Chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee is right to highlight the complexity of these issues. He will recognise that Turkey has the most complex of relationships with HTS. In fact, many have forgotten that HTS are a proscribed organisation in Turkey. Turkey also has legitimate terrorist concerns, which it has raised with this country on a number of occasions. Notwithstanding the complexity of the situation, we have to work with all groups in an inclusive manner, but I will be really clear that in the UK, we remain concerned about Daesh, and about extremism in camps that we know exist in the north-east. We are vigilant about those issues, and we are happy to—we have to—work with Kurdish minority groups, who will assist us in that enterprise.

Could my right hon. Friend share his assessment of the impact of events in Syria on the stability of the wider middle east, particularly Palestine, Israel and Lebanon? Is there a particular role for UN blue helmets beyond the buffer zones, given what has happened around the Golan heights?

My hon. Friend raises an important issue. On the one hand, some of what we see in Syria is a consequence of a diminished Hezbollah and a diminished Iran. On the other hand, we do not want further friction between Syria, its neighbours and others in the region. I saw the tanks that moved into the Golan heights, and I spoke to the Israeli Foreign Minister yesterday. He said that he believed that that was temporary, and that it was in response to what Israel sees as a breach of the agreement struck in the 1970s between the two parties, given that the Syrian regime has now fled from that border. I hope that the situation is temporary, but I recognise the security concerns.

The situation in Syria will inevitably lead to changes and increased pressure on migration routes. What steps have the Government taken so far on asylum claims from Syrian nationals? Can he commit to making sure that the Home Affairs Committee is kept updated on any changes?

The right hon. Lady is right to raise these issues. That is why I mentioned them in my statement, and why we are working in-country, both in Syria and with neighbours, to ensure that we do not have new migration routes open up. We want a safe and secure Syria that is inclusive of all communities; we have to be mindful of that.

Like many cities, Exeter is home to a Syrian refugee community, and it is frankly delighted by the demise of Assad’s appalling regime. What efforts can the Government make to support an inclusive political settlement that includes all Syria’s ethnic and religious groups—including, of course, the Kurdish community—potentially on the federal model, which has proven successful elsewhere in the region?

We recognise that many Syrians who have found a home in the United Kingdom are here specifically because Syria was not an inclusive place. As we hold out for that inclusive place, our intent is to work with partners to try to bring it about, but the truth is that this has to come from the Syrian people. The best we can do is to support public services and civil society. Long gone are the days when a P5 member such as ourselves could seek to construct the terms under which freedom is achieved. We have to work with partners on the ground.

We welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement on this fast-evolving situation. He has referred to the opportunities and risks for the many displaced Syrians who are looking to return to Syria. Will the Government be providing assistance to those Syrians in this country who wish to return to their homeland? Will the Government look to follow the example of European nations such as Germany, which has suspended asylum applications?

I have to say that that has not been put to me in the last few hours. The issue that has been put to me is the humanitarian need in Syria and the humanitarian support for its neighbours. I think the consensus in this House and the significant funds with which we have supported Syria should reassure people of our content to support people on the ground in the region.

Thirty-five years ago, as the evil regime of Erich Honecker collapsed and the Berlin wall came down, the threat of chaos in East Germany was countered, and that country reintegrated into western Europe only with the investment of $2 trillion. The Foreign Secretary rightly speaks of the dangers to the UK that continuing chaos in Syria could cause. If Syria is not to sink further into despair, and if the UK and other democracies are not to feel the repercussions, where will the necessary investment for Syria’s reconstruction come from?

My hon. Friend raises an important issue, looking ahead. He will recognise that there is a real bandwidth problem as we look across the world, and particularly across the middle east. Many would like to see a ceasefire in Gaza—I certainly would—and the road to reconstruction begin. Many of us want to see Putin exit his troops from Ukraine and face justice, and there will be the necessary reconstruction there. Of course reconstruction is necessary in Syria, but I remind the House that, under both the last Government and this Government, this country has provided £4 billion-worth of aid. UK taxpayers have played their part in supporting Syria. We have announced a further £11 million today, and we continue to play our part, but no one would suggest that we could do it all on our own.

The situation in the middle east is extremely volatile, and the situation that has played out in Syria over recent days only adds to that instability. Has the Foreign Secretary had conversations in recent days with Ministry of Defence colleagues about the potential need to reinforce and bolster security at our sovereign base areas in Cyprus?

I reassure the hon. Gentleman that those discussions are ongoing, as he would expect given the extent of the challenges in the middle east, and particularly the challenges previously in Lebanon.

The fall of Assad’s regime marks a pivotal moment for Syria, offering a chance to end over a decade of brutal conflict and suffering at the hands of a man content with using chemical weapons against his fellow citizens. What steps is the Foreign Secretary taking to ensure that Britain works with international partners to secure a stable and inclusive future for Syria, so that all Syrian people can finally live in peace and rebuild their lives?

I am grateful for the opportunity to repeat that it is very important for me to talk to Emirati, Turkish and Jordanian colleagues at this time, and for the Foreign Office operation to be engaged with the United States and others to ensure that we see a transition to genuine representation that is inclusive.

In 2013, this House voted against UK military action following the use of chemical weapons by Bashar al-Assad’s Government. One effect of that vote was to deter the British Government from taking action, but another effect was to have influenced the US Government into taking no action at that time. Will the Foreign Secretary support Parliament debating and voting on any future UK military action, even if we have learned from 2013 that there may be times when such scrutiny should happen after military action takes place?

Drawing on my 24 years of experience in this House, I would say that all Members take the subject of military action with a seriousness and sobriety we do not see with any other issue that comes to the Chamber. I do not think there is any disagreement in the House about Assad. It is important to remember that the person responsible for the crimes against the Syrian people is Assad, and his brutal regime.

The joy on the faces of Syrians and the horrors of the Saydnaya prison emphasise both the evil of the Assad regime and the hope for Syria’s future, as my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has said. However, the complexity of the ethnic, religious, political and military groupings within Syria and the wider region makes the pathway to a stable, peaceful and inclusive Syria challenging, to say the least. What practical steps can the UK take to support the bringing together of the appropriate Syrian representatives, to help enable them to build the peaceful, stable Syria that we all wish to see?

My hon. Friend is right, and she is drawing on years of experience of the issues of cohesion and the bringing together of different communities. Over the coming days, I hope to see that inclusivity in action. I have said to the UN special representative that the UK stands ready to support him in whatever way he deems necessary. Clearly, the UN will play an important role over the coming days. It is important that the regional actors, along with partners here in Europe and in the United States, are able to convene to ensure that the new rising tide in Syria is able to keep the hope that the people are demonstrating on the streets alive.

The Syrian Democratic Forces are managing detention facilities holding 9,000 Daesh fighters in Syria. What is the Foreign Secretary’s assessment of the likelihood of ensuring the continued management of those facilities, keeping people who threaten our security imprisoned? What action is he taking with allies to achieve that outcome?

As I have said, this is the No. 1 issue for the UK Government. We will continue to work closely with in-country partners and those in neighbouring countries to ensure that safety for our population. This is a very serious issue and the UK Government are fully engaged across all channels.

I welcome the Government’s decision to appoint Dame Margaret Hodge as the anti-corruption champion. She will do important work on illicit trading, not least in relation to drugs in Syria. We must not allow those routes to be a source of resource for violent terrorist groups. On the night when it became clear that the Assad regime was about to crumble, many of my constituents in Barking from Syrian backgrounds watched minute by minute—it was a highly emotional night for them. Along with the rest of the world, they saw the regime fall and, with it, decades of brutal rule that had destroyed lives. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that not only is this a moment of hope for the Syrian people, but it is a critical moment as we see the Russian and Iranian influence in the region pushed back, which is better for British national security?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for paying tribute to Baroness Hodge, who has been a doughty champion on issues of illicit finance. I am so pleased that she accepted this appointment. I was with her this morning at the National Crime Agency. My hon. Friend talks of the joy and hope in the hearts of members of the Syrian community in her constituency. We are seeing that right across our country and across the global community. We have to do all we can to support it, and hope and pray that Syria moves into a brighter future, understanding that it is one of the most ancient of countries. It has been a home for so many communities, and is one of the centres of the birth of civilisation.

I think we all welcome the fall of the Assad regime, but it is important that he and his henchmen are eventually brought to justice. As we have seen in Iraq and Libya, the swift fall of a dictator leads to a dysfunctional state, with potential for illegal immigration, terrorism and many other problems. What can the Foreign Secretary say about Britain’s role in ensuring that Syria does not become a dysfunctional regime, how we can prevent terrorism from moving from Syria into other parts of the world and, importantly, how we can deal on the ground with those who will genuinely have to seek asylum, rather than pushing them into the hands of people smugglers?

At the heart of what the right hon. Gentleman says is justice. He is absolutely right that the joy will quickly turn into accountability for what went before. We may see it coming out of the prisons, as people begin to interrogate what happened to the 100,000 who disappeared. People will want to hold those responsible accountable, and that is understandable. The right hon. Gentleman also raises important counter-terrorism issues. Daesh’s ability to direct, enable and inspire attacks within our country is significant; we have seen it behind a lot of global events. That is why we are proud of the part that we play in the global coalition against Daesh, and the work that we do in north-eastern Syria in particular.

What discussions are taking place with Turkey, because the SDF in the north and the east of Syria is doing an important job in containing Daesh fighters, and it is essential that it is able to continue to do that? Does the Foreign Secretary fear that Turkey’s actions may have a detrimental effect on the job that the SDF is doing?

I reassure my hon. Friend that I have a good working relationship with the Turkish Foreign Minister, Hakan Fidan. I spoke to him yesterday, and last week in Malta. I fully expect Turkey, as a member of NATO and a close friend of our country, to continue to work with us on those pressing issues, recognising the threats to itself as well as to the United Kingdom.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement on what I know is a fast-evolving situation. In the coming days and weeks, he will have to think about the issue of diplomatic relations with Syria. Does he agree that one prerequisite of that relationship must be the handing over of any chemical weaponry that Assad has left behind, and will he work with international partners to ensure that that chemical weaponry is taken off the hands of anyone who wants to retain it, so that it is destroyed and does not fall into dangerous hands?

In so many ways, this horrid story, or at least the global attention on this horrid story, began with the use of chemical weapons. It would be fitting to see them taken away and absolutely destroyed so that they can never be used again. It has been important to seek the clarification that those who have led this rebellion are working with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and have set themselves against any use of chemical weapons and the preservation of those stockpiles.

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and for the diligent and hard work of his Ministers, in particular the Minister for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), in keeping the House apprised of the ongoing issues, as he did last week and in the background over prior weeks.

Last week, I urged greater awareness of how the developments in Syria are interconnected, particularly with regard to Russia’s distraction and weakness. We all welcome the Foreign Secretary’s remarks on the escalation of the matter to a Cobra secretariat and the broad coalition we see on the Front Bench, in particular noting the security implications, the Home Office on migration flows, and his Department and the Ministry of Defence’s role in any stabilisation work. Will the Secretary of State provide his view on his Department’s ability to support such a significant piece of stabilisation activity alongside other work, following the disbandment of a Department for which that was the sole role?

As we know, the Russians have used their presence in Syria to expand their brutal security presence in other parts of the world, in particular Africa. What steps are we taking to assess how the developments will impact African states that have learned to rely on Russia for their security? Have we extended our hand of friendship to those states so they have the opportunity to avoid the manifestation of such situations? Finally—

Order. Members have to keep their questions short.

I could listen to my hon. Friend all afternoon, but let me set about answering his questions. I am grateful that he mentioned my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, because it enables me to thank him for the way he is pursuing his role at this time, getting right across the region and the issue and drawing on his own experience.

My hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) is right to raise the aid question and how, indeed, that aid is spent. In the context of Syria, sadly, we are talking about a civil society and non-governmental organisations that have been on the ground for many years, so he can draw some confidence from the accountability in the way we work with them. That was, for example, why we have made a further £300,000 available to the White Helmets, which has such a tremendous record. He is also right to talk about Africa and the way in which Russia has used Syria as a staging post for its actions there. Of course, we are making the necessary assessments of that capability now that Russia has retreated.

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for his statement. I welcome his confirmation of the continuation of UK humanitarian aid to the people of Syria. I also welcome his commitment that the future governance of Syria must be decided by the Syrian people and not by foreign actors. Does he agree that a safe, secure, stable and prosperous Syria is in the interests of not only the Syrian people but Britain? Will he commit the UK to taking all possible steps to support the peaceful transition to such a Syria?

Yes, I can confirm that.

I welcome the long-overdue fall of Assad’s murderous regime and recognise the joy and hope and also trepidation that many Syrians are feeling. It is disgraceful that the first thought of some has been to call for Syrian refugees to be forced to return, while the hard-right Austrian Government have suspended family reunification and talked of resuming deportations. Will the Government pledge their continued support of those who have fled Syria and made their home in the UK and for their freedom to choose whether they return or remain here?

My hon. Friend is right to raise those issues. It is important to remember that Syrians have now been in this country for many years indeed. Their lives are here; their children were born here. Those are just not the first issues that come to mind. It is also important to recognise that Syria’s neighbouring countries—Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan—bear the biggest number of displaced people who have had to flee Syria. We can see from the scenes in the region that Syrians want to go back—they are desperate to go back—and we should support them to do that with the public services that they will no doubt need.

No one should grieve the demise of Assad, who was propped up for far too long by Russia and Iran. However, the links of HTS to al-Qaeda mean that the future is far from certain or secure. With that in mind, what steps have the Government taken to promote the rule of law in Syria?

The hon. Gentleman raises an important issue. Twenty-one years ago, al-Qaeda drove a truck-bomb into our consulate in Istanbul, killing 16 British and Turkish members of staff, and we should never, ever forget that. It was in the serious context of HTS being an alias of al-Qaeda back in 2017 that it was proscribed in the United Kingdom. I will not comment on issues of proscription, but one would expect any responsible Government to consider the detail of these issues very soberly and carefully, with partners such as the United States, for which that organisation remains proscribed.

The Syrian diaspora in York will welcome the fall of the Assad regime, but what follows really matters. What discussions has the Foreign Secretary had with the International Criminal Court about the crucial gathering of evidence at this time of transition to build the case for justice, which is the Court’s responsibility?

I assure my hon. Friend that we will of course do all we can to ensure that Assad is held to account. He is now huddled in Russia with that other war criminal, Putin, who must also be held to account for his monstrous crimes.

I do not think that anybody could deny Syrians their moment of joy over the weekend after their 13 years of devastating civil war and over half a century of being brutalised by the Assad regimes. However, a Syria whose future is decided by Syrians needs long-term stability. In the medium term, what work is being undertaken by the office for conflict, stabilisation and mediation to analyse the situation, and will it be made available to the House? In the shorter term, we have seen what can happen in other places after such a moment of joy, so in his immediate response, what lessons will the Foreign Secretary take from Iraq and Libya?

What happened in Iraq and Libya—the vacuum that engulfed those countries when a dictator left, leading to sectarian violence from group upon group and to those places becoming havens for terrorism—is deeply worrying. That is why, despite the joy, we remain cautious. We are keen to work with partners on the ground, keen to support civil society, and keen to encourage an inclusive society, as has been indicated by the UN special representative. We will continue to do all we can to avoid the quagmire that could replace the fallen dictator.

It has been deeply moving to see Syrian families reunited after years in Assad’s prisons. On the wider situation, it is important that we learn the lessons from the past—not least from Iraq and Libya, where years of even greater chaos and disaster replaced the dictatorships. Many countries are militarily involved in Syria, but people do not want our military resources or troops dragged into more wars in the middle east. Can the Foreign Secretary assure us that —as distinct from humanitarian aid, which is welcome—no military resources or personnel will be sent to Syria?

I am grateful for the way in which the hon. Gentleman has outlined the dangers after a dictator falls. He will understand that it would be wrong of me to comment on operational issues, but I find the scenario that he raises highly, highly, highly unlikely.

As the people of Syria come out of the horrors of war, torture and imprisonment, and many go into asylum, can the Foreign Secretary assure us that the foreign troops in Syria at the present time—particularly the Turkish troops in the north—will leave; that they will respect the right of the Kurdish people to live safely in their own area; and that any incoming Government in Damascus will also respect the diversity of the country and all the minorities, particularly the Kurdish minority? From his discussions with the Israeli Foreign Minister, is the Foreign Secretary satisfied that Israel will withdraw immediately from the area that it has illegally occupied over the past couple of days, just north of the already illegally occupied Golan heights?

We are in the early days of a fluid situation, so it is not for me to give the right hon. Gentleman the assurances that he seeks, except to say that of course I continue to talk to our closest allies in the region about their security concerns and the issues facing Syria. In relation to the conversation that I had with the Israeli Foreign Minister, there is an arrangement in place—it was put in place in 1970s. It has worked and has sustained an arrangement in the Golan heights. The Israelis’ assessment was that the withdrawal of the regime over the past few days—and the potential for chaos, which has been discussed in this House and was indicated in the right hon. Gentleman’s question—has required them to protect that buffer zone. As I have said, I hope that that situation is temporary.

As we have just heard, Israel seized more territory in the Syrian-controlled Golan heights yesterday. The Foreign Secretary just mentioned that Israel said that would be temporary, but the occupation is recognised as illegal under international law, so what will happen if the Israelis decide that it is not temporary?

My hon. Friend rightly says that that territory is illegally occupied. I confirm from the Dispatch Box that, as has been the case under successive Governments, the UK assessment is that it is occupied land.

May I bring the Foreign Secretary back to a point raised by the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), which I do not think he fully addressed? Will he assure the House that the Government will block any asylum applications from Assad’s acolytes in the years ahead?

I have seen it mentioned in the past few days that Asma al-Assad, as someone with UK citizenship, might attempt to come to our country. I confirm that she is a sanctioned individual and is not welcome here in the UK. Having appointed Margaret Hodge to her role this morning, and having introduced in the past five months more sanctions than ever before in that space of time, I assure the House that I will do everything in my power to ensure that no one from that family finds a place in the UK.

I declare an interest, in that several years ago I advised the moderate Syrian opposition coalition and other moderates. Does my right hon. Friend agree that in order to ensure that the Syrian people are at the heart of the new Syria and to strengthen stability, it is important that the new political structures are democratic and pluralistic; that the moderate opposition, who have dedicated themselves to planning for this day ever since the horrors of 2011, are closely involved; and that engagement with our allies and the United Nations—which I know is ongoing—is prioritised, particularly given UN Security Council resolution 2254?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for that question, and for his work on, experience of and dedication to these issues over many years. There has been a lot of focus on HTS, but he will recognise that those who freed Damascus contain many groups. Many groups make up the opposition, coming from different positions, and the inclusive Syria that we talk about has to be a place that includes all of them. My hon. Friend is right to put on the record those groups that our own country has been able to work with over many years.

I thank the Secretary of State very much for his statement. The downfall of the Assad regime and the liberation of Damascus are to be lauded. The same Damascus, of course, is one of the earliest places where Christianity was taught and preached, as the Bible mentions—Damascus is often mentioned in the good book.

The free world has failed in the protection of minority groups and religious beliefs. We need to be mindful that Turkey and Turkish-led terrorists are currently attacking Kurds in northern Syria. It is estimated that Turkey has killed some 300,000 Kurds in northern Syria since 2018, with another 300,000 facing the same fate today. Furthermore, with Damascus having gained its freedom, minorities in Syria must be protected against the brutal, violent and evil HTS. Will the Secretary of State ensure that this transitional peace Government will engage to protect all religious minorities in Syria?

The hon. Gentleman is right to remind the House of the ancient nature of Syria, and the many religious communities that have found a home there and made it up over thousands of years. We will continue to work with all such groups, and the hon. Gentleman’s question underlines the complexity of the issue and the challenges for Syria as we look ahead.

Members from across the House, including the Secretary of State, have talked about the religious and ethnic complexities of Syria. What does the Secretary of State make of those who are calling for a federal-type system in Syria? Should the Government be giving capacity and voice to those views and approaches?

There have been a number of propositions in the last few days, all of which merit further scrutiny and understanding. I am not going to back any single suggestion on behalf of the UK—I think it is important that those suggestions should come from organisations on the ground, and that we continue to work with regional partners. I stand by what I said before at the Dispatch Box: long gone are the days in which a plan is drawn up in the UK Foreign Office and presented as if it is the plan. That cannot be the way; we have to work with the grain of Syrian society, as complex and diverse as my hon. Friend rightly suggests it is.

Like Minister Falconer, I was at the Doha forum this weekend, and there was palpable relief among the vast majority of delegates that the brutal murderer Assad had finally fallen. However, Sergey Lavrov also attended the Doha forum, and although I boycotted his session, the readout was that he was deeply uncomfortable in answering questions about Syria—rightly so, as he has so much Syrian blood on his hands, alongside his boss Vladimir Putin. Does my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary agree that it is unacceptable for Russia to retain its two military bases in Syria, and that those bases must be closed down for the stability of the region?

My hon. Friend makes a very strong point about Russian capability and desire. The two bases that exist also run operations into Africa and support militia groups on the African continent, and Russia’s long-standing, cynical desire to have a deep sea port in the region is what sat behind Putin’s support for Assad in the first place. We see Vladimir Putin in this Parliament.

Order. I quickly remind Members that I am going to run this statement to the end. I think the hon. Member for Leeds Central and Headingley referred to Minister Falconer by name, which of course he should not have done.

In his statement, the Foreign Secretary referred to HTS co-operating with the international community on the monitoring of chemical weapons. Given the situation on the ground in Syria and the ongoing chaos, what confidence does he have that there is the capacity for HTS to conduct that work? Is there anything the UK Government can do to support the capacity in the region to keep those weapons safe?

Working with the OPCW on the ground is hugely important, and the work of the UN envoy is also essential. We will do all that we can to ensure those stockpiles are properly protected.

There will be great jubilation at seeing the back of Assad. I very much welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, including his reference to illicit finance, which is critically important, and what he said about building an inclusive society that protects minorities. This is a great moment of hope, but it comes with trepidation as well. The Foreign Secretary spoke of a new hope for Syrians getting their country back, and I am grateful for his clarification regarding the Golan heights. Whatever emerges from this transition, I know he shares the desire to seek a reliable partner and a supporter of democracy to replace this dreadful regime, but can he say something about the urgency of establishing that partnership and the timescale for it? What work is going on with partners to make sure that it happens quickly?

I am very grateful for the interest in these issues and in the region that my hon. Friend has shown over many, many years. He will understand that we are in the foothills here, and that a lot has to be done to stabilise Syria at this time. In that context, it is a little premature to give a timetable. I understand why he wants one—he wants to guarantee that things will not go south over the coming months—but the issues that I raised relating to oil, fuel and energy and support for public services are pressing on our minds. We have to ensure that disorder does not set in, and that is what we will be working closely on with partners over the coming days.

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, and the detailed and nuanced answers he has given to what have been some complex questions are extremely welcome. One thing that is not complex is the fact that Assad is a murderer who has taken 500,000 people’s lives, and my right hon. Friend was absolutely right to resist calls to reopen channels and negotiate with him.

I have two questions: one simple, one not so simple. First, does my right hon. Friend agree that every single Member of this House should welcome the downfall of Assad? Secondly, does he have thoughts on what this means for Russia? Will its catastrophic failure in Syria change its behaviour in other conflicts, including in Ukraine?

I think my hon. Friend can feel the united position on Assad in this Chamber. We are one of the great democratic Chambers of the world, which is why we know a dictator when we see one, and we call that out across the House. On the other point my hon. Friend makes about Putin, I am always reassured in these moments that in the end dictators fall because they never attend to all of their population. They always suppress the will of minority groups and opposition, and in the end they have to run their countries with a horrible, horrendous iron rod, because they know—as we saw with those statues coming down—that there is a target on their back. That is where I take heart about the future of Vladimir Putin.

I want to echo the calls welcoming the downfall of the brutal and evil Assad regime, and just to press the Foreign Secretary a little. What steps will the Government take to preserve all the humanitarian routes available, and to ensure that a moderate, prosperous and, indeed, multi-polar Syria emerges from the present situation?

There is the £11 million I have announced in further aid to support the civil groups. As I have said, I have had conversations today with regional partners to ensure that those routes are available, and it is good to see people feeling able to return home.

My right hon. Friend was right in his statement to emphasise the effects of global instability on illegal immigration into the UK. Not only is supporting displaced Syrians as they return home the right thing to do—although it is the right thing to do—but it supports the security of the UK. Can he assure the House that Syrians returning home will have ongoing humanitarian support from this Government?

Yes, I am very pleased to say that at the Dispatch Box.

I join the Foreign Secretary, the shadow Foreign Secretary and everyone across this House in welcoming the demise of Assad’s brutal regime. Unlike my predecessor in Rochdale, Mr George Galloway, who tweeted his support for Assad this weekend, much to the disdain of many in my constituency, I do not mourn Assad’s demise. We should not be surprised by Mr Galloway, given that he has long been a friend of dictators across the planet. I remind the Foreign Secretary that Assad was no friend of the Palestinian people—he bombed, tortured and murdered Palestinians who stood up to him. Does my right hon. Friend also recognise their bravery today?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to remind the House that our own democracy has demagogues and charlatans who can prey on individuals. He is also right to remind us that so few were safe under Assad’s brutal regime, which saw the murder of hundreds of thousands of people, people disappearing on a scale that certainly the 21st century had not seen and the use of chemical weapons. That he has found safety and comfort in Russia is, frankly, appalling. He should be rotting in a jail for all that he has done.

Like many in this House, I have campaigned and worked with Syrian friends in their struggle over much of the last decade, and I welcome the demise of Assad. The Secretary of State is absolutely correct that it is for the Syrian people to decide what happens next, although I greatly fear that the voices of many Syrian people will not be heard unless they are given strong international support to be heard. There is a strong pro-democracy and pro-human rights movement in Syria, particularly among women and youth-led organisations. What are the Government doing to ensure that the voices of women and youth are heard?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise the importance of women and youth. Women have been mentioned, but youth not so much this afternoon. I have been aware of youth groups in Syria over many years, and we will do all we can to amplify those voices at this time.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for the statement.

Bill Presented

Domestic Abuse (Aggravated Offences) Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Josh Babarinde, supported by Caroline Voaden, Alex Brewer, Lisa Smart, Liz Jarvis, Anna Sabine, Calum Miller, Ben Maguire, Alison Bennett, Charlotte Cane, Helen Maguire and Dr Danny Chambers, presented a Bill to create certain domestic abuse aggravated offences; and for connected purposes.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 24 January 2025, and to be printed (Bill 145).