Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
Security Council said … 110 days … is stretching the meaning of the word
‘immediate’ to breaking point.”
France took “the view that it was possible by continuous diplomacy to secure
Saddam Hussein’s compliance. We take a different view. I think the facts and
history are with us.”
IAEA position on Iraq’s nuclear programme
The FCO advised No.10 on 4 March that the UK Mission in Vienna had confirmed
that the IAEA was on the verge of closing the file on nuclear issues in Iraq, despite
information from the UK that had “still not been followed up”.288 The IAEA had apparently
concluded that:
There was “no significant evidence that Iraq had attempted to procure uranium
from Niger”. The documents the IAEA had seen “that formed the basis of such
an allegation appeared to be forgeries”.
Aluminium tubes, “although imported illegally”, were “not connected with a gas
centrifuge programme”. The Iraqis had “satisfactorily explained the use of the
tubes, and the reasons for their various fine tolerances”. The Iraqis “were no
longer (if ever) in a position to manufacture a gas centrifuge, especially without
foreign assistance”.
There was “no evidence to link the magnets with a covert nuclear programme”;
the IAEA had found the part in the guidance system of a missile.
The IAEA had evidence that a significant amount of the missing 32 tonnes of
HMX (a high explosive used to help trigger nuclear fission), had been used for
commercial purposes, as the Iraqis had claimed”.
The positions of other members of the Security Council
936.  Sir John Holmes advised on 4 March that France was intent on preventing
the US and UK mustering the nine positive votes required for a majority in the
Security Council.
937.  Sir John Holmes confirmed on 4 March that France’s main aim was to “avoid being
put on the spot” by influencing the undecided, preventing the US and UK mustering nine
votes, and keeping alongside the Russians and Chinese; and that there was “nothing
that we can now do to dissuade them from this course”.289 He advised that “nothing the
French say at this stage, even privately, should be taken at face value”.
938.  If the French strategy failed, Sir John advised that “a lone French veto remains
hard to imagine but is by no means out of the question”.
288  Letter Owen to Rycroft, 4 March 2003, ‘Iraq Weapons Inspections: IAEA Line on 7 March’.
289  Telegram 110 Paris to FCO London, 4 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Avoiding a French Veto’.
350
Previous page | Contents | Next page