Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.7  |  Development of UK strategy and options, 1 February to 7 March 2003
he realised the limitations; more for the Security Council, as he saw that more than
a few days would be needed to find language that brought people together.”
269.  Commenting on the debate in London on ideas for the final stages of diplomatic
activity, Sir Jeremy advised that the Franco-German proposals for reinforced inspections
would be:
“… recognised by the Security Council middle ground as a delaying tactic and
unlikely to make a difference on complete disarmament … But Council members
remain very reluctant to grant cover for military action within weeks … The
Americans may be upbeat about the likely effect of their lobbying and cajoling.
But I cannot say at this point that we would definitely get nine votes for a material
breach resolution on the basis of what seem to be the Blix/ElBaradei intentions
for the 14 February report.
“Injecting an ultimatum … might possibly help at the margins … though I would
hesitate to bank on it. If the ultimatum was directed at Saddam’s departure …
that would be a clearer criterion than offering up elements of WMD. But the
Americans are right that the Council majority are expressly opposed to the idea
of regime change …”
270.  Sir Jeremy suggested consideration of “a more radical halfway-house plan”:
“If the UK has to be sure of recapturing the initiative, we may have to think bolder.
We should test the Franco-German model to destruction. A Chapter VII resolution
authorising all necessary means for the specific purpose of hunting down hidden
WMD is worth considering. The objective has to be to place enough Coalition troops
on the ground, with No-Fly and No-Drive Zones declared by the Security Council
throughout Iraq, for mobile WMD transports etc to be tracked down, revealed and
destroyed. Baghdad and other major cities would be left to one side, at least for the
first stage. There could be arrangements for interviews offering greater protection
than the present.”
271.  Sir Jeremy thought that, when faced with the alternatives, Council members would
“rally to this approach”. But it might not “readily fit” the American “military preferences”.
Sir Jeremy wrote:
“… the most important aspect … would be Saddam’s reaction. He would bitterly
oppose a UN-authorised take-over of parts of Iraq. If it were imposed on him, he
might quickly break the no-resistance conditions. In that case, the ‘last resort’ would
have been much more clearly established.”
272.  Sir Jeremy concluded:
“This plan does not have to be used immediately. We could go through the stages
of presenting and arguing for the second resolution of the kind we have been
discussing, before coming to a final decision. But the prospects of a 15-0 SCR
229
Previous page | Contents | Next page