Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
which we have to achieve our ends – that of the elimination of Iraq’s WMD
capacity; but the latter has to be the goal;
(ii) on whether any military action would require a fresh UNSC mandate (Desert
Fox did not). The US are likely to oppose any idea of a fresh mandate. On
the other side, the weight of legal advice here is that a fresh mandate may
well be required. There is no doubt that a new UNSCR would transform the
climate in the PLP. Whilst that (a new mandate) is very unlikely, given the
US’s position, a draft resolution against military action … could play very
badly here.”
473.  Addressing the consequences of military action, Mr Straw wrote:
“A legal justification is a necessary but far from sufficient pre-condition for military
action. We have also to answer the big question – what will this action achieve?
There seems to be a larger hole in this than on anything. Most of the assessments
from the US have assumed regime change as a means of eliminating Iraq’s
WMD threat. But none has satisfactorily answered how that regime change is to
be secured, and how there can be any certainty that the replacement regime will
be better.
“Iraq has had no underlying history of democracy so no-one has this habit or
experience.”
474.  Mr Straw also wrote:
“I will talk to you about handling the PLP. But one thing which would help greatly is
agreeing that any UK action would have to be endorsed by a substantive resolution
of the Commons. There is precedent for this – in the Gulf War. It makes the
Government look weak and condescending to its own parliamentary party, to evade
a substantive vote. A more messy alternative expression of dissent (on the division
for the adjournment) cannot be avoided if there is no substantive vote. The question
will also be asked of you – if there can be substantive votes on a trivial issue like
hunting, why not on war?”
475.  Mr Straw’s minute does not appear to have been sent to anyone outside No.10.166
476.  A minute from Mr Patey states that Mr Straw and Mr Blair were due to meet on
26 March to discuss “amongst other things, Iraq”.167
477.  An undated manuscript note from Mr Powell to Mr Blair suggested that Mr Straw
wanted to discuss his advice.168
166  Minute Straw to Prime Minister, 25 March 2002, ‘Crawford/Iraq’.
167  Minute Patey to Goulty, 25 March 2002, ‘Iraq: Military Action’.
168  Manuscript comment Powell to PM, [undated], on Minute Straw to Prime Minister, 25 March 2002,
‘Crawford/Iraq’.
472
Previous page | Contents | Next page