Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
thereafter to the entire region of the Middle East … so that it is free of mass
destruction weapons”.
7.  The letter challenged a statement made by Sir Jeremy Greenstock, UK Permanent
Representative to the United Nations in New York, that Iraq had been provided with
the opportunity to dispose of its weapons of mass destruction, but Iraq had ignored
that opportunity and decided to keep possession. The letter asked why “none of
the representatives” of the members of the Security Council had “asked … when,
how or where such an alleged decision had been taken by Iraq to keep weapons of
mass destruction”.
8.  Iraq referred to the American Administration having exerted pressure and threatened
to leave the UN if it did not agree to what America wanted; and that America threatened
to perpetrate “aggression”. Iraq feared that the United Nations may “lose the trust and
interest of peoples”. “All those” who were concerned about the organisation were “called
upon to exercise caution and act in accordance with international law and the Charter of
the United Nations”.
9.  Iraq appealed to Mr Annan to ensure that those implementing the resolution did not:
“… push the situation to the edge of the precipice … because the people of Iraq
will not choose to live if the price is their dignity, homeland, their freedom or things
sacrosanct to them. On the contrary, the price will be their lives if that is the only way
forward to preserve what must be preserved.”
10.  The UK remained sceptical about Iraq’s intentions, focusing on its track
record of deceit and deception, and repeating the need to maintain the threat
of military action to secure compliance.
11.  In a lecture that evening, Mr Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, welcomed Iraq’s
response “so far as it goes” but added:
“… we must remain vigilant for experience with Iraq tells us to temper optimism with
scepticism and to read the small print. Iraq’s intentions are notoriously changeable.
What matters above all is their actions not their words.
“… The history of UN weapons inspections in Iraq is littered with examples of
deceit, evasion, intimidation and harassment. I hope even Iraq will recognise the
consequences of any repeat. If Saddam fails to co‑operate fully, then he faces force.
“UNSCR [UN Security Council resolution] 1441 sets out the pathway to peace.
Those of us who negotiated the text were determined to ensure that it was
not a set of traps for Iraq … But we must be clear: he will not comply unless he
is sure that the international community has another route to disarmament – the
military route …”2
2  The National Archives, 13 November 2002, The Future of Foreign Policy.
6
Previous page | Contents | Next page