Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
Introduction
1.  This Section addresses the discussions within the UK Government between
September 2000 and September 2001 on the UK’s Iraq strategy, in the light of questions
over the sustainability of the existing policy of containing Iraq, the election of a new US
Administration and concerns over the legal basis for the No-Fly Zones (NFZs).
2.  The Section follows on from Section 1.1, which addresses the UK’s Iraq strategy
between 1990 and September 2000, and is followed by Section 3.1, which addresses
the development of the UK’s Iraq strategy from September 2001. Section 3.1 also
summarises UK policy and thinking in September 2001.
Before September 2000
3.  Iraq’s failure to comply fully with UN Security Council resolutions over a period of
10 years, or with international treaties to prevent the proliferation of nuclear, chemical
and biological weapons, was seen as a challenge to international order, the authority
of the UN and the rule of law. 
4.  On the basis of its past behaviour, and the evidence found by UN and the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors between 1991 and 1998, it was
widely assumed that, although the inspections had been successful in dismantling and
containing Iraq’s capabilities, Saddam Hussein’s regime had the intent and much of the
knowledge to develop ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction if it had the
opportunity to do so.
5.  In addition, the UK Government and some others believed that, given the
opportunity, Saddam Hussein aspired to exercise regional power through the threat
or use of force, and would not be constrained by international law or decisions of the
Security Council.
6.  A policy of containing Iraq initially designed to meet short-term needs had been
extended for over a decade. Sanctions were hurting the population of Iraq without
having a significant effect on Saddam Hussein’s regime. The Security Council was
divided about the benefit of maintaining sanctions and the way ahead, and there were
doubts about how long the existing policy could be sustained. Iraq was confident in
continuing to resist the return of inspectors. Internal opposition had been suppressed
and exile organisations had limited support. The strains within the international
community were clear.
7.  The Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction, the Butler Report,
concluded in July 2004 that there was a “progressive reduction” in the Joint Intelligence
Committee’s (JIC’s) estimates of Iraq’s capabilities in the period to 1994/1995 but
“growing suspicions and concerns” between 1995 and 1998.1 Those suspicions and
1  Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction [“The Butler Report”], 14 July 2004, HC 898.
188
Previous page | Contents | Next page