Britain’s history of military strikes explained

Rishi Sunak agreed to UK air strikes against Houthi rebels in Yemen late on Thursday night after an emergency call with his Cabinet.

The Prime Minister sent in four Typhoons to hit terrorist positions in response to the armed group attacking shipping in the Red Sea.

But he faced immediate questions from MPs over why he did not consult Parliament before launching the joint military action with the United States.

Layla Moran, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said the move was “shameful” and demanded a retrospective vote.

Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader, added that it was “utterly disgraceful that Parliament has not even been consulted”.

But the military action was backed by Sir Keir Starmer, who said that “clearly the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea have to be dealt with”.

His spokesman told reporters ahead of the strikes being announced that he did not believe a Parliamentary vote would be necessary before such action.

However, the Labour leader did urge Mr Sunak to “set out the justification, the limits and scope of the operation” in a statement to MPs “as soon as possible”.

There is no legal requirement for No 10 to consult Parliament ahead of taking military action, though it has been convention to do so since 2003.

David Cameron, the then-prime minister, updated the Cabinet Manual in 2011 to say that MPs should be given the chance to debate sending in forces except in emergencies.

Here, The Telegraph looks at how the Government has approached four recent conflicts.

2003: Iraq

Two years earlier, Tony Blair had held Parliamentary debates on sending British troops into Afghanistan, but he had not asked MPs to vote.

But when it came to joining the Iraq war, which was much more controversial, the then-prime minister decided he needed the backing of the Commons.

Mr Blair set a political precedent by not only tabling a motion authorising military action but saying that he would not commit forces unless it passed.

In the end, MPs authorised him to join the war alongside the US, on the premise that Saddam Hussein held weapons of mass destruction.

After swiftly toppling the dictator, British forces ended up staying in the country for eight years, finally leaving in 2011 and handing over to the Iraqi army.

2011: Libya

Mr Cameron authorised air strikes on Libya which began on March 19 2011, in support of rebels who were trying to topple dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

Parliament was not consulted before the first Tornado jets were sent in to drop bombs on the country, to enforce a UN resolution on a no-fly zone.

MPs were called to the Commons to debate the military action two days later, and on March 21 they voted to retrospectively authorise it.

Mr Cameron told them that the swift action days before had come “just in the nick of time” to “avert what could have been a bloody massacre in Benghazi”.

Britain, the US and France carried out months of strikes which led to the deposing of Gaddafi, though Libya has been plagued by instability since.

2013: Syria

Two years later Mr Cameron did seek Parliamentary approval for air strikes against Syria and was dealt a shock defeat by Labour and Tory rebels.

Mr Cameron wanted to join US-led action against Bashar al-Assad’s regime over its use of chemical weapons against its own people.

But he was forced to abandon the plans after the Commons rejected a Government motion by 285 votes to 272 amid angry scenes in the chamber.

The decision was welcomed by Russia but prompted dismay in Washington and Paris, who were once again the other main partners in the military plans.

Barack Obama and François Hollande, then presidents of America and France, ended up abandoning the strikes, with the Assad regime going on to carry out dozens more chemical attacks.

Mr Cameron went back to Parliament a year later and did get MPs’ backing to carry out air strikes on the Islamic State group in Syria and Iraq.

2018: Syria

Five years on from Mr Cameron’s shock defeat, his successor Theresa May sent in RAF jets to bomb chemical weapons factories in the country.

She chose not to ask for Parliament’s consent before doing so, arguing that the military action was justified on urgent humanitarian grounds.

Mrs May did address the Commons three days later, telling MPs there was clear evidence Assad was behind a chemical weapons attack in Douma.

But, unlike Mr Cameron in relation to Libya, she did not seek their retrospective approval for the strikes which were carried out with the US and France.

Despite the Western military action Assad remains in power in Syria, and in recent years has become increasingly close to Vladimir Putin, the Russian president.

Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month, then enjoy 1 year for just $9 with our US-exclusive offer.