Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.7  |  Development of UK strategy and options, 1 February to 7 March 2003
689.  In a speech on reintegrating Iraq into the international community at Chatham
House on 21 February, Mr Straw focused on the threat which Saddam Hussein posed
to the people of Iraq and the moral case for action.195
690.  Mr Straw stated that there was international unity about the objective of disarming
Saddam Hussein who posed “a unique threat to international peace and security”.
But “with each passing year” of Iraq’s defiance, there had “been a growing awareness
of the immense consequences of a failure to match our words with actions”, and:
“The stakes could not be higher. If the UN proves unable to act on the spirit and
the letter of mandatory Chapter VII resolutions when faced with the most egregious
non-compliance it risks joining its predecessor, the League of Nations, as a footnote
in history.”
691.  Mr Straw said that, without military pressure on Iraq, there would be “no
co‑operation; no inspections”. Mr Straw also stated that the threat of military action
was “and always has been, about pressuring Saddam Hussein to comply with
resolution 1441”.
692.  In preparation for visits to key capitals to pursue support for the UK’s position,
Mr Julian Miller, Chief of the Assessments Staff, informed Sir David Manning that a script
was being prepared which would:
“… briefly summarise evidence and judgements on Saddam’s WMD, describe the
effect of some of the agents; set out the Iraqi response to UNSCR 1441, including
the flaws in the 7 December declaration; and cover what we know of concealment,
intimidation of witnesses and other aspects of non-co-operation. It will also provide
supporting material on Saddam’s regime and – briefly – on links with terrorism.
We will update the pack as new material becomes available.”196
693.  Sir Jeremy Greenstock reported that, during a briefing for E10 representatives
in New York on 21 February, he had made clear that the UK viewed war as a last
resort, but the objective of disarming Iraq had to be achieved and the threat could not
be allowed to continue for much longer. Verified disarmament had not happened; and
no-one had explained how inspections could work without Iraq’s co-operation. The UK
supported the UN as a relevant international body, and did not favour unilateral action.
Sir Jeremy stated:
“We had to factor in the US determination to deal with Iraq … [The UK was]
prepared to work with the E10 members to achieve a unified Council keeping the
pressure on Saddam and perhaps allowing him to crack.”197
195  The National Archives, 21 February 2003, Reintegrating Iraq into the International Community –
A cause with ‘compelling moral force’.
196  Minute Miller to Manning, 21 February 2003, ‘Iraq: Briefing Foreign Government’.
197  Telegram 294 UKMIS New York to FCO London, 21 February 2003, ‘Iraq: 21 February’.
301
Previous page | Contents | Next page