Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
960.  Mr Straw agreed after the meeting with Mr Blair that Mr Ivanov could share
Mr Straw’s proposals with Mr de Villepin and Mr Fischer.296
961.  France, Germany and Russia stated on 5 March that they would not let
a resolution pass that authorised the use of force.
962.  Mr de Villepin, Mr Ivanov and Mr Fischer met in Paris on 5 March.
963.  In a press conference after the meeting the Foreign Ministers declared that they
would “not allow a resolution to pass that authorises resorting to force”.297 Russia
and France, “as Permanent Members of the Security Council, will assume all their
responsibilities on this point”.
964.  Sir Christopher Hum, British Ambassador to China, advised on 4 March that
if the resolution was put to a vote that day, China would abstain.
965.  Mr William Ehrman, FCO Director General Defence and Intelligence and
Mr Straw’s Special Envoy, met the Chinese Vice Foreign Minister, Mr Wang Guangya,
and a senior official from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), on 4 March.298
966.  The report of the meeting with Mr Wang records that, following a briefing on
the UK’s assessment of Iraq’s non-co-operation and the need for a second resolution,
China’s view was that Iraq must bear the major responsibility for failing to co-operate
fully, but believed inspections should be given more time. Although it might take longer
to resolve the issue by peaceful means, the time taken would be worth it. There was
a common desire amongst the international community to avoid war. Unanimity was
important for upholding the authority of the UN. China was still studying the draft
resolution. Pressing for a vote now would split the Council and harm its authority.
967.  Mr Ehrman had referred to the points emphasised by Mr Blair in his speech to
Parliament on 25 February. He told Mr Wang that Saddam Hussein’s behaviour since
the middle of 2002, when he had directed the implementation of a concealment policy,
had been “instructive”; and Saddam’s aim was to buy time. Mr Ehrman described
key elements of the concealment policy and stated that much of the evidence in the
UK’s September 2002 dossier “had been supported or confirmed subsequently by
UNMOVIC (for example the range of the Al Samoud 2 rockets)”. Despite Iraq’s efforts,
the UN inspectors had found a number of undeclared items and “Iraq itself had ‘found’
four empty chemical warheads and one aerial bomb containing biological agent”. Iraq
was particularly concerned about interviews with scientists because “if carried out as
mandated they would expose Iraq’s WMD programme” and had obstructed the process.
The UK “judged it unlikely that Saddam would leave” and “faced with military defeat,
296  Telegram 37 FCO London to Moscow, 5 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Foreign Secretary’s Meetings with Russian
Foreign Minister, 4 March’.
297  The Guardian, 5 March 2003, UN war doubters unite against resolution. The Guardian, 6 March 2003,
Full text of Joint declaration.
298  Telegram 89 Beijing to FCO London, 4 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Lobbying the Chinese’.
354
Previous page | Contents | Next page