Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
like “serious consequences”. Any member of the Security Council would be free
to bring the issue back to the UN.
Casting OP10 in terms of a stark warning that the Iraqis must comply with the
resolution but without specifying what would follow if they did not.
Putting the “all necessary means” provision into a second resolution.100
300.  Sir David stated:
“There should be no difficulty if Blix [Dr Hans Blix, Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC]
notified the Council that Saddam was in breach. It might be more difficult if there
were a series of low level skirmishes between Blix and the Iraqi authorities that we
interpreted as obstruction but that the French or others tried to interpret differently.
In that event, we should have to be very clear and very tough.”
301.  Mr Blair and President Bush were to discuss the issue the following day. Sir David
asked the FCO for advice.
302.  Mr Straw spoke to Secretary Powell at 12.30pm on 2 October and talked him
through proposed language for “the ‘one and a half’ resolutions” they had discussed.101
303.  Mr Straw’s Private Office subsequently advised Sir David Manning that:
The US and UK were focusing in the P5 in New York on the arrangements
for inspections in OP5, which would leave “time for the Prime Minister and
President Bush to discuss the most politically difficult point, the consequences
of non‑compliance, in OP10”.
It was clear that “both the French and the Russians” would “insist that the
Council must take a second decision before the use of force is authorised”.
Mr Straw and Secretary Powell had “therefore agreed to look at an alternative
two stage approach”, which Mr Blair and Mr Straw had “always seen … as a
possible approach to achieving our overriding objective of getting the inspectors
in to tackle the disarmament of Iraqi WMD”.
That “would involve a first resolution establishing a tough inspections regime and
sending a strong signal of the Council’s willingness to authorise the use of force
in the event of Iraqi non‑co-operation”.
There “would be a private side agreement committing the French/Russians
to agree the adoption of a short second resolution authorising the use of force
in the event of clear Iraqi violations”.
To address French and Russian concerns that OP10 as drafted could authorise
the use of force on a trivial pretext, it would be redrafted to “drop the prior
determination that any violation constituted a material breach and the prior
authorisation” for the use of “all necessary means”.
100 Letter Manning to McDonald, 1 October 2002, ‘Iraq: Conversation with Condi Rice’.
101 Letter McDonald to Manning, 2 October 2002, ‘Iraq’.
254
Previous page | Contents | Next page