Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.5  |  Development of UK strategy and options, September to November 2002 –
the negotiation of resolution 1441
913.  Sir Jeremy told the Inquiry:
“The French and Russians and some others were absolutely determined to establish
that there should be no use of force without a specific decision of the UN Security
Council. The United States was absolutely determined to resist the need for a
specific decision by the United Nations Security Council on the use of force. Those
two positions were irreconcilable.”317
914.  Sir Jeremy told the Inquiry:
“It was actually quite surprising to me that only the Mexican delegation said
unequivocally that they expected that, if it came to the use of force, it would be solely
the Security Council that had the authority to take that decision. The Irish delegate
said something similar … but not as unequivocally as the Mexicans. Strangely, the
French and the Russians, who were, as it were, our antagonists in this operation in
the Security Council, were equivocal in what they said in their explanations of vote,
which they had to be, because they had tried to negotiate specific language in 1441
and they had failed to negotiate that.”318
915.  Summing up the position following adoption of Resolution 1441, Sir Jeremy said:
“This is where diplomacy gets clever and, as you can see from the outcome, from
1441, too clever for its own good, but diplomacy got clever and it produced a text in
1441 that was equivocal on two issues: one, what should happen if Saddam Hussein
and his regime did not comply with the terms of 1441; and who should be the judge
of whether or not Iraq was complying with the terms of 1441.”319
916.  Sir Jeremy also told the Inquiry:
“It was not expressly stated in any operative paragraph of 1441 that the Security
Council should meet and decide what to do in the case of non‑compliance, and that
was where the French and the Americans met, that there should be a further stage
of consideration but that further stage of consideration should not necessarily mean
that there would be a further decision of the Security Council if force had to be used
under the terms of the whole corpus of resolutions up to that point.”320
917.  Mr Chaplin told the Inquiry:
“… there was a surge of hope after 1441. 1441 was quite a remarkable achievement
and if the Security Council could once more come together, as it had before, and
we could see a track record going way back into the 90s, that, when the Security
Council were united, Saddam Hussein took notice, as indeed he did on this occasion
317 Public hearing, 27 November 2002, page 40.
318 Public hearing, 27 November 2009, pages 47‑48.
319 Public hearing, 27 November 2009, pages 40‑41.
320 Public hearing, 27 November 2009, page 41.
363
Previous page | Contents | Next page