When James Deneslow quoted me online as observing that President Bashar al-Assad of Syria (Report, May 11) was a "decent man doing a difficult job", he failed to point out that this remark was made circa 2001, 10 years ago. In those days it was fairly obvious to every-one that the young Bashar had a more modern and less repressive outlook than his father (which was not difficult).
My current view of the situation in Syria is that the older and now more experienced and mature President Assad has chosen his course: it is firmly to align himself with his vicious, omnipotent security and intelligent forces and crush the popular uprising taking place in his country. As such, he is not worthy of our tolerance and has forfeited any entitlement to our goodwill.
What is dispiriting is the apparent decision of the US government and many in Europe to go soft on Assad and fail to put any meaningful pressure on him to stop murdering and intimidating his own people. While the British government says it is giving a moral and humanitarian lead in Libya, save for a few grace words and gestures, it accepts what is happening in Syria. In doing so, it is open to the charge of inconsistency in its policies towards the Arab spring.
Of course, intervention in Syria to support those being gunned down and rounded up is difficult. But there are ways open to the international community to makes its feelings known. Instead, the foreign secretary seems to share the preponderant view in the US and the Israeli governments that if the west does not keep hold of Assad it might be faced with something worse.
This position will be welcomed among hardliners in Damascus, Teheran, Hamas and Hezbollah and will do nothing to foster much needed political change in Syria.
House of Lords