THERE should be no need for a dispute within the Labour Party over the looming possibility of a Commons vote on bombing Syria.

Just a few weeks ago, the party conference agreed a resolution on the issue which, despite shortcomings, is clear enough.

For the benefit of those members of the shadow cabinet who appear not to have read it, here it is: “Conference believes the Parliamentary Labour Party should oppose any such extension [of bombing] unless the following conditions are met:
“1. Clear and unambiguous authorisation for such a bombing campaign from the United Nations.

“2. A comprehensive European Union-wide plan is in place to provide humanitarian assistance to the increased number of refugees that even more widespread bombing can be expected to lead to.

“3. Such bombing is exclusively directed at military targets directly associated with ‘Islamic State’ noting that if the bombing campaign advocated by the British government in 2013 had not been blocked by the PLP under Ed Miliband’s leadership, ‘Islamic State’ forces might now be in control of far more Syrian territory, including Damascus.

“4. Any military action is subordinated to international diplomatic efforts, including the main regional powers, to bring the Syrian civil war to an end, since only a broadly based and sovereign Syrian government can ultimately retake territory currently controlled by ‘Islamic State’.

“Conference believes that only military action which meets all these objectives, and thus avoids the risk of repeating the disastrous consequences of the 2003 war in Iraq and the 2011 air campaign intervention in Libya, can secure the assent of the British people.”

In the view of Stop the War Coalition, even a military campaign which conformed to all those criteria, which are frankly very unlikely to be met, would still be an unwarranted and pointless intervention which would add to the sum of human suffering in Syria. The present bombing in Iraq proves that.

Nevertheless, the resolution represents a block in David Cameron’s road to war. And it is, to repeat, Labour policy, not the whim of anyone, even a leader with such a recent and expansive mandate as Jeremy Corbyn.

But it has come under sustained, if indirect, attack from Labour MPs.

The most overt opposition has come from shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn. In a Guardian article last week he went well beyond the terms of the resolution in three specific respects.

First, he urged Cameron to actively work to secure the United Nations resolution referred to. Second, he hinted, in lawyerly language, that Labour might support bombing of Syria even if no such UN resolution was forthcoming.

And third, he deliberately mixed up the issue of bombing Islamic State (Isis), a possibility conceded in a highly contingent fashion in the resolution, with “humanitarian intervention” to establish so-called “safe havens,” which wasn’t.

Benn’s article came with the endorsement that it represents Labour’s official view on the matter, and spin to the effect that it left open the possibility of Labour backing war without UN authorisation.

It is a reminder that diluting Labour’s position on Syria is a win-win for the party’s right wing. It gets the party back in the military intervention game, removing the stain, as they see it, of the 2013 vote. And it damages the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, with his long association with the Stop the War Coalition, as a sort of collateral damage.

An attempt to hedge the issue was the floating of suggestions that Labour MPs be given a “free vote” on bombing.

Under this scenario, bombing would most likely be approved, but the sting of anti-Corbyn rebellion would have been drawn.

There should be no question of allowing this. War is not a matter of conscience, save for absolute pacifists, but of policy.

And Labour’s policy was made abundantly clear at the party conference just a few weeks ago.

Corbyn has rightly called for policy sovereignty in the party to be restored to conference.

In effect, a free vote would be tantamount to allowing the bombing of Syria. Some Labour MPs would doubtless rebel against a whipped vote in support of Labour policy in any case.

Some would be committed Blairite neocons, while others would be animated by a desire to do anything, however debased, to damage Corbyn.

However, their number would be limited. A free vote would increase the pro-war element considerably, since it would give the confused all the alibi they need to line up with the government.

The worst aspect of such vacillation, and of the Benn article in particular, is that it amounts to a come-hither to David Cameron, inviting him to bring a proposal for bombing Syria in the sure anticipation of victory, either because he will secure official Labour backing or because enough Labour MPs will support his resolution in any case.

It is therefore urgent to put all possible pressure on Labour MPs to stick to their own party policy as a minimum.

That means explaining the humanitarian and strategic realities of the Syrian situation to those MPs who are uncertain.

It means explaining the alternative route of a real diplomatic settlement to the Syrian conflict and extended assistance to refugees while outlining the dangerous consequences for Syrian civilians and great-power relations alike of any extension of the war.

And for those Labour MPs who are still committed to the neoconservative interventionist approach it means confronting them with the hideous record of their policies so far this century — millions dead or displaced, state collapse throughout the region, sectarian conflict incited, economies wrecked and global tension heightened.

The Scottish National Party has clearly recognised it is time to break with the crimes of the recent past, as its conference last weekend voted to oppose bombing Syria. Can Labour afford not to do likewise?

Above all, it is time for a major upsurge in anti-war campaigning across the country.

Our demands should be clear. All foreign military intervention in Syria should end immediately. The Syrian conflict must be dealt with through political and diplomatic negotiations, with an end to the preconditions which block progress.

While these negotiations should include all regional and global parties that are affected by the conflict, the future of the Syrian government must be decided by the Syrian people alone, free of all external interference.

And Britain must abandon plans for bombing Syria, cease bombing Iraq and end its support for US global domination in favour of respect for every nation’s right to self-determination and sovereignty.

• Andrew Murray is chair of the Stop the War Coalition.