Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
It had been decided not to include a provision about exile, but “we were telling
our Arab friends that we had got exile language”.
Mr Prendergast stated that giving Saddam Hussein impunity would cause a “big
public problem: how could we ignore the ICC [International Criminal Court]”.
Mr Straw responded that “if the choice was between war or immunity”, he had
the sense that “people would breathe a sigh of relief”.
If there were to be a conflict, “the UN had a role in humanitarian aid
and reconstruction, and only the UN could give legal authority for any
post‑Saddam government”.
Mr Annan was reported to be “disturbed” by the American position that everyone
had to vote for the resolution “or else the UN would be irrelevant”. The US knew
it needed the UN on a range of issues. The UN was “bigger than Iraq”.
Mr Straw responded that “if we failed the cohesion of the Security Council would
be weakened”.
1078.  Sir Jeremy Greenstock reported that Mr Annan had approved.
1079.  In a meeting with Dr Blix on 6 March, Mr Straw had “acknowledged” that the
draft resolution:
“… missed out a necessary intermediate step. We now proposed to offer Saddam an
opportunity to show full compliance accompanied by a slightly longer time frame …
“… [the Government’s] agenda was disarmament and not regime change.
The Prime Minister had told Ivanov that if Saddam gave up his WMD he could
stay. President Bush could not say this publicly, but he too would prefer peaceful
voluntary disarmament to war. If Dr Blix, as the most important witness in the whole
process, reported to the Security Council that Iraq was co-operating then the bunting
would go up in London.”337
1080.  Mr Straw had also “stressed that the underlying intelligence picture which was
agreed by a number of services from several countries was clear – Saddam was not
complying and was misleading the inspectors”.
1081.  Dr Blix told Mr Straw that he would report that the Iraqis had made “some
progress but they still had a long way to go”. Dr Blix “did not personally doubt that the
Iraqis were self sufficient in precursors and had the capability to jump start production
of a range of agents. But the inspectors had found little … although the Iraqis had been
‘hyperactive’ of late in handing over documents and making other gestures, overall
they were not co-operating fully.” Dr Blix had agreed with Mr Straw that “while difficult
to define we would all soon realise what constituted compliance when the Iraqis started
co‑operating fully”.
337  Telegram 373 UKMIS New York to FCO London, 7 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Your Meeting with Blix: 6 March’.
372
Previous page | Contents | Next page