Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
The inspectors should have “the time that is necessary for their mission
to succeed”. The Council should meet again at Ministerial level, on 14 March,
to “assess the situation”.
The use of force was “not justified at this time” and “premature recourse to the
military option would be fraught with risks”. It would call the unity of the Council
into question, and that would: “… remove its legitimacy and, in the long run, its
effectiveness. Such intervention could have incalculable consequences for the
stability of a scared and fragile region. It would compound the sense of injustice,
would aggravate tensions and would risk paving the way for other conflicts.”
The priority was fighting terrorism. France had no intelligence of the links
between Al Qaida and the Baghdad regime alleged by Secretary Powell
on 5 February. Military action would exacerbate the divisions that nurtured
terrorism.
France did not exclude recourse to force if the inspectors reported that it
was “impossible for inspections to continue”. In that case, the “Council would
have to take a decision, and its members would have to shoulder all of their
responsibilities”.
389.  Sir Jeremy Greenstock commented that Mr de Villepin’s “impassioned plea
for continued inspections” had won “unprecedented applause from the gallery”.106
390.  Mrs Alvear called for the inspections process to be continued and enhanced.
391.  Chile was dismayed by the divisions in the Council and called for a return
to co-operation and unity to achieve Iraq’s disarmament.
392.  Mrs Alvear stated that indications of progress raised “some hopes for a decisive
change of attitude” from Iraq towards the demands of the international community, but
other attitudes revealed “an intention not to co-operate” and gave rise to “suspicions
about the presence of weapons of mass destruction”.107 Iraq was not fully implementing
the resolutions and pressure on Saddam Hussein’s regime had to be maintained
“relentlessly and without relaxation”.
393.  Chile believed that the “inspections process must be continued, strengthened and
expanded to make it accurate, intrusive and capable of thwarting any effort at deception
or evasion”.
394.  The Security Council had a “key role” and Chile had “noted with dismay over the
past month a growing division within the Council”. While that was “rooted in positions”
that were “legitimately different”, it had been “fuelled by a lack of willingness to listen and
to propose”. Chile wished to contribute to a “return to the path of debate and to a method
106  Telegram 265 UKMIS New York to FCO London, 15 February 2003, ‘Iraq: Blix and ElBaradei
Presentations: Open Debate’.
107  UN Security Council, ‘4707th Meeting Friday 14 February 2003’ (S/PV.4707).
250
Previous page | Contents | Next page