Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.7  |  Development of UK strategy and options, 1 February to 7 March 2003
410.  Mr Straw concluded by stating that the period since resolution 687 (1991) had
been passed had “frankly been a period of humiliation” for the Council and the UN as
“games have been played with the Council’s authority”. The Charter required the Council
to “back the diplomatic process with a credible threat of force and also, if necessary,
to be ready to use that force”. If the Council decided to:
“… back away … to give unlimited time for little or no co-operation on substance –
then the disarmament of Iraq and the peace and security of the international
community, for which we are responsible, will not get any easier, but very
much harder.
“This issue is not just about Iraq … If we send out the message to proliferators … that
defiance of the United Nations pays, then it will not be peace that we have secured.”
411.  Secretary Powell stated that the Council should consider whether it was time
to consider the serious consequences intended by resolution 1441.
412.  The points made by Secretary Powell included:
The inspectors had reported progress, but it was on process not substance, and
tricks were being played by Iraq.
Resolution 1441 was about disarmament, not inspections. It stated that Iraq was
in material breach of its obligations and must now come into compliance.
The requirement in the resolution for a full, complete and accurate declaration
of its activities had been “an early test of Iraq’s seriousness; the answer in its
declaration [of 7 December] was that it was not going to co-operate”.
Connections between Iraq and terrorist organisations were “now emerging”.
We could not wait for weapons of mass destruction to show up in our cities.
The weapons “could kill tens of thousands of people” if they “got into the
wrong hands”.
If Iraq had been co-operating, documents would be flooding in and there would
be a queue of interviewees.
Iraq did not need time to decide to co-operate. Iraq’s recent actions were not
responsible, they were “continued efforts to deceive, to deny, to divert, to throw
us off the trail”.
Resolution 1441 had anticipated Iraq’s response. The improvements in process,
more inspections and a longer inspection period would not move the position
that Iraq had “failed to comply”.
The threat of force “should always be a last resort”, but it “must be a resort”.
The process could not be “endlessly strung out”, as Iraq was trying to do, until
the world’s attention moved in other directions.
Iraq could not “be allowed to get away with it again”. The Council had
to think through the consequences of walking away or the reality of facing
253
Previous page | Contents | Next page