Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.4  |  Development of UK strategy and options, late July to 14 September 2002
especially, if things went wrong. In such circumstances the US would need the
international community at the scene of the crime … A solo US effort that ended
in failure would give those who saw the EU as an alternative power to the US the
chance they had been waiting for.
“If the US answer to a coalition was ‘yes’, then UN involvement was essential.
The Prime Minister’s letter [the Note of 28 July] had been a little ambiguous on
who should issue the ultimatum; yesterday he [Mr Blair] had been clear that the
ultimatum should issue from the UN. He wanted a hard‑edged ultimatum with a clear
link to military action – but recognised that achieving such a text would be difficult. If
Saddam … accepted inspectors on our terms, the Prime Minister thought that would
end the case for military action for the time being. But he thought Saddam unlikely
to give in.”
108.  Mr Straw said that he had a slightly different opinion: “Saddam was a busker and
survivor”. Mr Straw added that: “it would be harder to make the case for military action
if he [Saddam Hussein] had been disarmed – and, eventually, Saddam would go”.
109.  Mr Straw told Secretary Powell that Mr Blair’s view was that building a coalition
“meant working through the UN”; and that in the Middle East it meant doing something
on the Middle East Peace Process (MEPP). Mr Blair would be “willing to spend time and
political capital” on the latter “including holding a peace conference”. Secretary Powell
responded that although he had been the principal advocate of a conference, there were
not “enough elements to get it together”.
110.  Addressing the “public case”, Mr Straw said that the UK dossier:
“… needed a compelling last chapter. We could make a better case than the one
we had made so far. Traditional Cold War‑style containment did not work for WMD.
Rogue states did not have as much at stake as the Soviet bloc.”
111.  Mr Straw said that he had told Mr Blair about Secretary Powell’s “more sceptical
view of Russia’s likely support” but Mr Blair “was convinced that securing Russia
depended on the price”.
112.  Mr Straw asked whether military action would work. Secretary Powell explained
that US thinking had developed since the end of July; the “standing start” needed
an Iraqi trigger, so the US enthusiasm for it had waned. The focus was now on the
“generated case”.
113.  Mr Straw told Secretary Powell that “if there were action tomorrow the Prime
Minister would be in difficulties”. It was “not just the usual suspects causing trouble”;
respected retired officials were “publicly raising doubts” and the “lawyers were saying in
terms that there were not sufficient grounds … to support regime change”. On “military
action more generally” the lawyers “had not definitively opined but had said it would be
easier if there were an SCR”. Mr Straw drew Secretary Powell’s attention to the passage
113
Previous page | Contents | Next page