Britain launched its first airstrikes in Syria over the past week – just hours after the House of Commons voted overwhelmingly to authorise military action against Isis.

Following the vote, which authorised air strikes “exclusively” against Isis (also known as Daesh, Isil and so-called Islamic State), Royal Airforce Force Tornado jets bombed one oil fields in Syria on Thursday.

The attack marked the start of a campaign aimed at breaking the terror group’s financial network and ground network. Britain is not operating alone and has joined a coalition of forces prompted by the terror attack in Paris last month in which 130 people died.

The coalition, from France, the US, Russia, and most recently Germany, wants to step up efforts against the terror organisation.

Although the British parliament voted in favour of airstrikes, the move has faced criticism from, among others, UK Opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn, who said they were not enough to stop Isis in its tracks and that innocent people would die.

The Sunday Times of Malta spoke to local commentators about the escalating military action, asking whether this could offer the solution to the Isis problem.

Lawrence Gonzi

Former prime minister

The emergence of Isis and its use of the most horrific acts of violence against innocent victims demands a reaction from the civilised world.

The cold-blooded murders in Paris and so many other terrible events that have been carried out by the same or similar extremist jihadist groups pose a number of challenges to us all. Some advocate the use of military force as the ultimate response to the brutal tactics used by extremists in all of these conflict zones.

But history keeps telling us that no military solution resolves ideological conflict especially when this is camouflaged by supposedly “religious” and “spiritual” motivations.

Isis needs to be contained and military action to achieve this is inevitable. But we must all understand that challenging an ideology built on false religious premise demands an approach that exposes the falsity – indeed the blasphemy – embraced by these extremist jihadist groups.

History keeps telling us that no military solution resolves ideological conflict

Representatives of all religions need to speak out with one voice and condemn – not just this violence – but the very core of what this false ideology is supposed to represent.

Then we can start to talk about political solutions.

Karl Schembri

Regional media adviser for the Norwegian Refugee Council in the Middle East

All world leaders, including those from the UK, France and Russia, have agreed that there is no military solution to the conflict. Yet foreign governments continue to pour fuel onto the fire by sending arms into the country and supporting military action.

We have been witnessing first-hand the effects of the conflict by various parties in recent years. Instead of supporting armed actors militarily, all countries with a stake in the conflict need to press for a negotiated political settlement.

Military interventions and escalation by any side is only creating more civilian casualties and displacement. Over the past week there have been thousands of families in northern Syria who were caught in the crossfire. Many families are currently fleeing for safety in already highly overcrowded areas by the Turkish border. Refugees caught at the Jordanian border have also more than doubled over the past month. The increase in conflict has meant major humanitarian routes have been blocked and entry of aid through the designated border crossings from Turkey has been largely affected.

The increase in conflict has meant major humanitarian routes have been blocked and entry of aid through border crossings from Turkey largely affected

The Norwegian Refugee Council is one of many aid agencies that have had to suspend programmes in the areas of intensified conflict, affecting tens of thousands of people in need of food, shelter, blankets and plastic sheeting. Many will have to suffer through the cold as winter weather sets in without basic items after being displaced. Aid workers themselves are risking their lives with new offensives by various groups with some of them being forced to flee.

As humanitarian actors on the ground we fear that intensified military intervention will once again undermine hopes for real peace talks.

We are left with the impossible task of caring for ever more families forced to flee.

With the current intensification of fighting from all sides and more bombings bound to happen, civilians have been left with nowhere safe to go.

Schools, markets and bakeries are being bombed and women and children are under fire. Armed groups are getting nearer displacement camps, potentially forcing people to flee again.

Martin Scicluna

Former government defence adviser

I have puzzled about how I would have voted if I were an MP in the House of Commons on Wednesday. Despite reservations, on balance I would have entered the Yes lobby to bombing Daesh (Isis). Why?

First, the spread of Isis-inspired terrorism and its false vision of a ‘caliphate’ must be confronted if other countries (including Libya) are not to be similarly destabilised.

Second, Britain has a responsibility as a close friend and ally of France to respond to its call for military support.

Isis is the common enemy. It must be defeated

Third, Britain’s air power, though limited, will add a new dimension to the fire-power, reconnaissance capability and quick response readiness of the American, French and other coalition assets in the region.

Fourth, and most importantly, if action against Isis is to be effective and successfully pursued, it will only make sense if it is well embedded in a broader diplomatic, political and military strategy.

War is a contest of wills. Counter-terrorism is but one part of the spectrum of modern warfare. Britain’s diplomatic weight and its commitment to forging a coalition of nations determined to establish stability in the Middle East and destroying Isis makes its presence essential to the success of this strategy.

Isis is the common enemy. It must be defeated.

Carmel Vassallo

Former brigadier

Although the British strikes form a small part of the US-led air campaign, they come hot on the heels of the French immersion in the same military operation. This development is possibly the most important factor in the dynamics of the campaign because the international community is expressing a more united front against Isis.

Pronouncing judgement on the likely success or otherwise of this bombing campaign is premature.

Isis’s declared aim is to establish a caliphate over large swathes of the Syrian-Iraqi region. But, what Isis is actually doing is mesmerising the international community with several terrorist threats and acts.

The success of the air campaign depends on information from the intelligence services

In stark contrast with long established regimes like the one in Syria, Isis has no particular affinity with the region it wants to make its own; so there is no durable, cultural or traditional bond. If Isis leaders feel under serious threat in a given region, they may be wise enough to move their operating base elsewhere. Such organisations tend to establish themselves in pockets of land where they perceive a power vacuum or political chaos.

With the boots-on-the-ground policy clearly out of the equation, the success of the air campaign depends largely on accurate information that the intelligence services operated by the campaigners manage to extract regarding the Isis power base and the sources from where it yields the funds to conduct its operations in the region and elsewhere.

The air campaign will not bring permanent solutions.

However, if intelligently conducted, it could put Isis in check, possibly bashing its capabilities and thus giving the international community and, more importantly, the same people who for centuries have toiled in the affected regions enough time to sit around the negotiating table.