Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
Agreement on the text of a second resolution
668.  Mr Straw and Secretary Powell reached agreement on the text of the draft
resolution on 20 February.
669.  Sir Jeremy Greenstock gave Ambassador Negroponte a revised “light draft
resolution” on 19 February which:
noted (draft preambular paragraph 5) that Iraq had “submitted a declaration …
containing false statements and omissions and has failed to comply with and
co‑operate fully in the implementation of that resolution [1441]”; and
decided (draft OP1) that Iraq had “failed to take the final opportunity afforded
to it in resolution 1441 (2002)”.185
670.  Sir Jeremy reported that he had told Ambassador Negroponte that the draft “was
thin on anything with which Council members could argue and would be less frightening
to the middle ground”. It did not refer to “serious consequences” and that “instead of
relying on OP4 of 1441”, the draft resolution “relied on OP1 of 1441, re-establishing the
material breach suspended in OP2”.186
671.  Sir Jeremy added that issuing the draft would signal the intent to move to a final
debate, which they should seek to focus “not on individual elements of co-operation but
on the failure by Iraq to voluntarily disarm” and being “thrown off course by individual
benchmarks or judgement by Blix”. It should be accompanied by a “powerful statement
about what 1441 had asked for” which had “been twisted into partial, procedural,
and grudging co-operation from Iraq”; and that “substantive, active and voluntary
co‑operation was not happening”.
672.  In response to a question from the US about whether the “central premise”,
that the final opportunity was “now over”, would be disputed, Sir Jeremy said that:
“was where we would have to define our terms carefully: voluntary disarmament
was not happening.”
673.  The US and UK agreed they should co-sponsor the resolution with Spain and that
the UK would “lead in explaining it to the Council”.
674.  Lord Goldsmith’s response to Sir Jeremy Greenstock’s rationale for the second
resolution is addressed in Section 5.
675.  Mr Straw had two conversations with Secretary Powell on 20 February. In the
first, they discussed UK and US drafts for a second resolution. Mr Straw said that he
had “no firm view about which one was best”.187 Sir Jeremy Greenstock’s view was
that the lighter the language the more likely the UK was to attract the support needed
185  Telegram 288 UKMIS New York to FCO London, 20 February 2003, ‘Iraq: 19 February:
Draft Resolution’.
186  Telegram 287 UKMIS New York to FCO London, 20 February 2003, ‘Iraq: 19 February’.
187  Letter McDonald to Manning, 20 February 2003, ‘Iraq: Conversation with Colin Powell, 20 February’.
298
Previous page | Contents | Next page