Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.4  |  Development of UK strategy and options, late July to 14 September 2002
“renounce all involvement with terrorism and permit no terrorist organisations to
operate in Iraq”; and
“destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long range
missiles and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous
inspection”.
543.  President Bush set out Iraq’s failure to meet those obligations. Iraq had “broken
every aspect” of the last pledge, including:
“Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the
production of biological weapons.”
UN inspections had revealed that Iraq “likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard
and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding
facilities capable of producing chemical weapons”.
Iraq continued “to withhold important information about its nuclear program”;
employed “capable nuclear scientists and technicians”; and retained “the
physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon”. It had “made several
attempts to buy high‑strength aluminium tubes used to enrich uranium for a
nuclear weapon”. If Iraq acquired fissile material, “it would be able to build a
nuclear weapon within a year”.
Iraq’s “state controlled media” had “reported numerous meetings between
Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his
continued appetite for these weapons”.
Iraq also possessed “a force” of SCUD‑type missiles with greater than permitted
range and was “building more … that can inflict mass death throughout the
region”.
Iraq had “subverted” the OFF programme “to buy missile technology and military
materials”.
Despite the UN’s demands for the return of inspectors, Iraq had had “four
years … to plan and to build and to test behind the cloak of secrecy”.
544.  Challenging the United Nations to act, President Bush stated:
“We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when
inspectors were in his country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left?
The history, the logic and the facts lead to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein’s
regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against
the evidence. To assume … good faith is … a reckless gamble … [T]his is a risk we
must not take.
“We have been more than patient … Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts
and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction. The first time we may be
completely certain he has … nuclear weapons is when … he uses one. We owe it to
all our citizens to prevent that day from coming.
185
Previous page | Contents | Next page