Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.2  |  Development of UK strategy and options, January to April 2002 – “axis of evil” to Crawford
478.  There is no No.10 record of that discussion.
479.  Mr Straw told the Inquiry that his recommendation was:
“… not a route of regime change … [but] not containment.
“Of course there was debate about whether we should just put up with containment,
but the problem with just putting up with containment, not withstanding [resolution]
1409 [adopted in May 2002] was that it wasn’t going anywhere … Meanwhile, the
perception of the risk had completely changed …”169
480.  Asked if the messages to the US Administration before 25 March that the UK was
prepared to be part of a coalition pursuing regime change had pre-empted his advice,
Mr Straw told the Inquiry that his minute to Mr Blair was part of the debate in the UK
Government.170 Part of that was how to handle the US.
481.  Mr Straw added that the UK had succeeded in achieving its policy objective when
the US was persuaded to go down the UN route “for the sole purpose, not of regime
change, but of dealing with, ‘The threat posed by Iraq to international peace and
security’”.
MR STRAW’S CONVERSATION WITH SECRETARY POWELL, 25 MARCH 2002
482.  In a conversation with Secretary Powell, on 25 March, Mr Straw was reported to
have described the political situation in the UK as:
“… generally ‘twitchy’, mostly for domestic reasons. Everyone accepted the case
against Iraq but not everyone acknowledged that post-11 September, our tolerance
of threats to security had reduced. He explained the need for military action,
should it take place later in the year, to be clearly within international law, even if
not explicitly endorsed by UNSCRs. He understood American impatience with our
approach … There would be a real problem if the objective of military action were
regime change. The Foreign Secretary felt entirely comfortable making a case
for military action to deal with Iraq’s WMD and could even say that the means of
meeting those concerns might be regime change, but this could not be the objective.
Politically we needed a strategy to swing parliamentary, public and European opinion
behind whatever course of action we took.”171
483.  When he saw the record of the conversation with Secretary Powell, Mr Wood
reminded Mr Straw that a further decision by the Security Council was likely to be
needed to revive the authorisation to use force in Iraq.172
169  Public hearing, 21 January 2010, pages 17-18.
170  Public hearing, 21 January 2010, pages 20-21.
171  Telegram 194 FCO London to Washington, 25 March 2002, ‘Iraq: Foreign Secretary’s Conversation
with Colin Powell 25 March 2002’.
172  Minute Wood to Private Secretary [FCO], 26 March 2002, ‘Iraq’.
473
Previous page | Contents | Next page