Labour says support for attack need ‘significant change in circumstances’

Amid lobbying to repeat a British parliamentary vote on military intervention in Syria, opposition leader Ed Miliband has said he will only support an attack if Britain’s national security is at risk.

Last week British MPs voted down the Conservative government’s motion seeking authorization to take part in a likely US-led attack on Syria over an alleged chemical attack last month.

Following the defeat, many Conservative MPs blamed on Miliband’s Labour party, lobbying began by former Conservative leader Lord Howard of Lympne, London’s Conservative Mayor Boris Johnson, former Liberal Democrat leader Lord Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon and former Conservative Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind to revive the motion.

Miliband said before the vote that Labour will support an attack if an established link is found between the Syrian government and the chemical attacks, if there are legal justifications for intervention and if the United Nations is properly consulted.

However, sources quoted him as saying on Monday that Labour requires a “very significant change” in circumstances to back military action.

“There would need to be very significant change [for Labour to support military action]. There are two examples: if al-Qaida got possession of very large stockpiles of weapons or if there is a direct threat to national security,” a senior Labour source said.

This comes as there are also speculations that Miliband’s toughening of tone follows government policy, especially regarding Defense Secretary Philip Hammond’s comment after the parliamentary vote that Britain will not be involved in military action unless circumstances “change very significantly”.