Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
23.  Mr Blair added:
“… the people who will be most delighted to see the end of Saddam are the people
who are his first and primary victims – his own people. In those circumstances, I do
not believe that it will recruit people to the cause of terrorism … what will recruit
people to the cause of terrorism is a belief among these fanatics that the will of the
international community is weak, that it does not have a determination to confront
these issues, and that, when faced with the challenge, we will fail to meet it.”
24.  In response to a question from Mr James Paice (Conservative) about the need to
explain to the British public “the conjunction between the Iraqi situation and international
terrorism”, Mr Blair stated that “we have constantly tried to explain to people” that the
two issues of WMD and terrorism were “not separate”. Both represented “the threats
of the fanatical over the rational … [T]hreats to the civilised world from acts of barbarity.”
The fact was that the two issues were:
“… intimately linked … without a doubt, if we do not deal with both these issues at
some point … [they] will come together. It is simply not possible to have a situation
in which states are developing and trading in this stuff, with their scientists being
hired by the top bidder, and in which terrorist groups are well-financed and able to
recruit … It is not possible to have those two threats operating and for them not to
come together at a certain point, and the consequences would then be devastating.”
25.  Mr Blair stated that he was taking a risk politically on Iraq because he did not “want
to be the Prime Minister to whom people point the finger in history and say, ‘You knew
perfectly well that these two threats were there, and you didn’t do anything about it.
In the end, you took the easy way out …’ We know that those threats are there and
we have got to deal with them.”
26.  Asked by Mr Ian Lucas (Labour) to confirm that he would support military action
against Iraq only if the UN weapons inspectors certified that there was a continuing
material breach of UN resolution 1441, Mr Blair responded: “That is exactly the position
I have outlined. If the inspectors continue to certify that Iraq is not co-operating fully, that
is a material breach. It is precisely so that the inspectors can make those findings a fact
that we put them there.”
27.  Mr Blair’s statement was repeated in the House of Lords by Lord Williams of
Mostyn, the Lord Privy Seal.2
28.  Lord Strathclyde (Conservative) supported the need for action, stating that a second
resolution was highly desirable but it “should not be used as an excuse for delay”.
He also asked for further information about the specific danger Saddam Hussein posed
to the UK. He concluded that Saddam Hussein had been given “a second chance once
2  House of Lords, Official Report, 3 February 2003, columns 20-33.
184
Previous page | Contents | Next page