Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
686.  Dr Rice told Sir David that the objections raised by France in relation:
“… to the language dealing with: ‘material breach’; ‘serious consequences’; and
OP5 … were unacceptable to Washington. The US had gone a long way in meeting
French and Russian difficulties. The earlier reference to ‘all necessary means’ had
been dropped … there was agreement to go back to the Council to assess any
Blix report of violations; and it was clear to everyone that a second resolution could
be tabled by the French whatever the US and UK might prefer. The Administration
could not give any more ground … on the substance. There had been lots of
publicity about US concessions already. Today there were two editorials in major US
newspapers … saying it was time for Washington to put down its draft resolution …
either the UN backed the resolution; or the US went to war.”
687.  Sir David told Dr Rice that he “understood the political pressures” but the effect
of tabling a resolution “on a take‑it or leave‑it basis would not necessarily be clear
cut”. France and Russia might table a resolution which might attract more support.
In response to a comment from Dr Rice that the US and UK “would have to veto the
counter‑draft just as the French and Russians would no doubt veto ours”, Sir David
replied that was possible, “but deeply unattractive”. That was why the UK had proposed
discussion at Foreign Minister level.
688.  Dr Rice told Sir David that the:
“Essential elements for the US were:
Maintaining the references to ‘material breach’ and ‘serious consequences’
Retaining the wording ‘… false statements or omissions … and failure by
Iraq at any time to comply …’
Standing firm on the terms of the inspections regime
No further weakening of OP12.”
689.  Sir David stated that the UK’s willingness to co‑sponsor the resolution
demonstrated that it was “in firm agreement on the elements” of the resolution, but he
“accepted that there might be differences on where to compromise if there was a serious
negotiation”. That would be a matter “for the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary”
whom he would consult. Dr Rice also said she would try to set up a conference call
between herself, Sir David, Secretary Powell and Mr Straw.
690.  Dr Rice concluded that France still seemed to misunderstand the US position, and
its apparent belief that the US would, if pushed, concede was “mistaken”. “Washington
was ready to go it alone if it had to; and the consequence would be that the UN would
be marginalised for a long time to come.”
691.  Sir David suggested that he was not sure President Chirac understood. It “seemed
to him” that President Chirac’s “grasp of the issue” was “uncertain, and sometimes
emotional”. Dr Rice should talk to the Élysée.
322
Previous page | Contents | Next page