Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.7  |  Development of UK strategy and options, 1 February to 7 March 2003
Progress with interviews continued to be “unsatisfactory”, although there had
been “some improvement”. Iraq was likely to continue attempts to monitor
interviews and to resist interviews outside Iraq.
Iraq was likely to support proposals – for more time for inspections or an agreed
timetable or checklist – put forward by those in the UN reluctant to authorise a
resolution permitting war.
1073.  Mr Miller concluded:
“In short, we have seen no indication that there will be a change in Iraq’s strategy …
Iraq will continue to put the onus on the inspectors to set out what they want rather
than pro-actively provide information … Saddam will be prepared to offer further
concessions – or at least to say he is ready to. But based on current behaviour any
information will be incomplete, will be difficult to interpret and will not represent a
full declaration of Iraq’s capability. On overseas interviews and any proposal for
a substantial UN military force, agreement is likely only in the face of imminent
military action.”
MR STRAW’S MEETINGS IN NEW YORK, 6 MARCH 2003
1074.  In a meeting with Mr Annan, Mr Straw set out the thinking on revising the second
resolution.336
1075.  Mr Straw told Mr Annan that military considerations could not be allowed
“to dictate policy”, but the military build-up “could not be maintained for ever”, and:
“… the more he had looked into the Iraq dossier the more convinced he had become
of the need for action. Reading the clusters document made his hair stand on end.”
1076.  Mr Straw set out the UK thinking on a deadline, stating this was “Iraq’s last
chance”, but the objective was disarmament and, if Saddam Hussein did what was
demanded, “he could stay”. In those circumstances, a “permanent and toughened
inspections regime” would be needed, possibly “picking up some earlier ideas for
an all‑Iraq NFZ [No-Fly Zone]”.
1077.  Other points in the discussion included:
Mr Kieran Prendergast, UN Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs, pointed
out that the UK was “reversing the veto: if there were no positive finding, then
there would be war”.
Mr Ricketts stated that “it had to be this way round if there were to be a
clear deadline”.
336  Telegram 366 UKMIS New York to FCO London, 7 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Foreign Secretary’s Meeting with
UN Secretary-General, New York, 6 March’.
371
Previous page | Contents | Next page