Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.5  |  Development of UK strategy and options, September to November 2002 –
the negotiation of resolution 1441
Country
Ireland
(continued)
Russia
Bulgaria
Extracts from Explanations of Vote (EOV)
“As far as Ireland is concerned, it is for the Council to decide on any ensuing action …
we are confident that, should it be necessary, the Council will … face its responsibilities.
“… As the concept of material breach is a key element of this resolution … Ireland’s
understanding of this concept is in accordance with the definition contained in the
1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: ‘the violation of a provision essential
to the accomplishment of the object or purpose of the treaty … We fully expect this
same definition to be applied in determining whether any further material breach has
occurred, should it become necessary to do so.”
“… our delegation participated constructively in work on additional procedures for
inspections that would ensure there would be no resumption of Iraqi programmes for
weapons of mass destruction and at the same time would create the conditions for a
comprehensive settlement of the situation around Iraq, including the lifting of sanctions.
“At all stages … we were guided by the need to direct the process of a settlement onto
a diplomatic and political path and not to allow a military scenario … the resolution …
contains no provisions for the automatic use of force. It is important that the resolution’s
sponsors today officially confirmed … that that is their understanding and that they
provided an assurance that the resolution’s objective is the implementation of existing
Security Council decisions concerning Iraq through inspections …
“… it is of fundamental importance that the resolution clearly confirms that all Members
of the United Nations respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq … It
also confirms the need for full implementation of resolution 1382 (2001), whereby all
members of the Security Council undertook to seek a comprehensive settlement …
which assumes the lifting of sanctions.
“The … wording is not ideal … but that reflects the very complicated nature of the
compromise that was reached. The Russian Federation made a choice … What is most
important is that the resolution deflects the direct threat of war and that it opens the
road towards further work in the interests of a political diplomatic settlement.
“It is particularly important that … in the event of any kind of disagreement over
disarmament matters, it is the heads of UNMOVIC and of the IAEA who will report …
to the Security Council, and that it is the Council that will consider the situation …
“Implementation … will require goodwill … the willingness to concentrate on moving
forward towards the declared common goals, not yielding to the temptation of unilateral
interpretation of the resolution’s provisions and preserving the consensus and unity of
all members of the … Council.”
“This Resolution is not a pretext for automatic recourse to the use of force …
“My country welcomes the fact that the resolution categorically reaffirms the centrality
of the Security Council in our decision‑making process.”
349
Previous page | Contents | Next page