Syria: Rapid change leaves Britain with a political dilemma.

The pace of the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria is giving us real-time insight into foreign policy dilemmas.

In the twinkling of an eye, the concrete is becoming solid, and a whole series of strange questions arise.

A dictator flees, his government falls and Foreign Secretary David Lemmy addresses MPs in the Commons, telling MPs that Assad is a “monster,” a butcher,” a “drug dealer” and a “rat.”

But things are moving fast.

When asked if Britain would suspend asylum applications from Syria, Lemmy indicated he did not know.

He did not know that his cabinet colleague, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, was saying at that very moment that he was being suspended.

In the year to September, the fifth largest number of asylum claims by nationality came from Syrians and almost every claim – 99% – was approved.

But the government, along with France, Germany and others, is now blocking applications.

Why?

The main reason, he said, was that the majority of people applying for asylum from Syria were doing so because they were fleeing the Assad regime.

That government is now gone and hence, before it, the central case is being made in most petitions.

A second reason, which has been described as numerically less significant but still a potential cause for concern on security grounds, is that Syrians associated with the failed regime are now seeking asylum.

Government figures are now also considering the possibility that some Syrians in the UK may now want to return to their country of origin.

And what and who comes next in the evening?

There has been a lot of talk about Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or HTS, over the past few days.

The British government declares them a banned terrorist organization.

The United States and the European Union attach their own labels to what amounts to largely the same thing.

Prohibition means that it is a criminal offense for people to promote, support or become members of an organisation.

And in practice this means that the government cannot have traditional diplomatic relations with it.

It is one thing, when it is an organization it has nothing to do with it, and if it becomes the recognized government of a country.

So how soon can HTS be decriminalized?

Cabinet Office minister Pat McFadden, one of the government’s most senior figures, told the BBC there could be a “relatively quick decision” on whether to talk to HTS.

But the hours passed quickly and both the foreign secretary and the prime minister were urging a very slow pace, saying – according to the White House message – that HTS would be judged on its actions, its As a result it may take time. And it will not be rushed.

Lemmy said it was right to be “cautious.”

“No decision is pending,” Sir Keir Starmer said.

So much has changed so quickly in Syria, with multiple implications and difficult decisions – and there will be more to come.