Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
160.  Addressing the need for a second Security Council resolution if military action
proved necessary, Mr Straw stated that resolution 1441 did:
“… not stipulate that there has to be a second … resolution to authorise military
action in the event of a further material breach … The idea that there should be
a second resolution was an alternative discussed informally among members of
the … Council … during the weeks of negotiation, but no draft to that effect was
ever tabled … nor put to the vote ...
“I should make it clear … that the preference of the Government in the event of
any material breach is that there should be a second … resolution authorising
military action. However, the faith being placed in the Security Council … requires
the Council to show a corresponding level of responsibility. So far it has done and
I believe it will do so in the future, but we must reserve our position in the event that
it does not … So the discussion … in the event of a material breach, will be on the
understanding action will follow.”
161.  Mr Straw also stated:
“… the moment there is any evidence of a material breach … there will be a
meeting of the Security Council at which it is … open for any member to move any
resolution … Our preference is for a Security Council resolution, and I hope we
would move it.”
162.  Addressing whether the House of Commons would be able to vote if military action
was necessary and, if so, when, Mr Straw told Parliament:
“No decision on military action has yet been taken … and I fervently hope that none
will be necessary … However, we have got this far in terms of Saddam’s compliance
only because active diplomacy has been backed by the credible threat of force.
For that threat to remain credible, it is crucial that we make proper preparations.”
163.  Mr Straw stated:
“Any decision … to take military action will be put to the House as soon as possible
after it has been taken … [T]he Government have no difficulty about the idea of a
substantive motion on military action … at the appropriate time.”
“… If we can come to the House without placing our troops at risk, we shall do so …”
164.  In response to questions, Mr Straw added:
“… if we can and if it is safe to do so, we will propose a resolution seeking the
House’s approval of decisions … before military action takes place.”
165.  Mr Michael Ancram (Conservative) supported the motion although he sought to
highlight divisions within the Parliamentary Labour Party by asserting that he would have
“liked the motion to be more specific and stronger … and to dispel the uncertainties
32
Previous page | Contents | Next page