Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
The “three recent meetings of the Council more than fulfil the requirement
for immediate consideration of reports of non-compliance. So we can say
convincingly that the process set out in 1441 is complete. If we push a second
resolution to a veto, then the last word on the Security Council record is a formal
rejection of a proposal that Iraq has failed to take its final opportunity.”
152.  Mr Straw advised that it would be “more compelling in Parliament and with public
opinion to take our stand on the basis of [resolution] 1441, and the overwhelming
evidence that Iraq has not used the four months since then to co-operate ‘immediately,
unconditionally and actively’”. The UNMOVIC “clusters” document would be “a material
help in making that case”.
153.  Mr Straw advised Mr Blair that he interpreted Mr Annan’s “important” statement
on 10 March:
“… essentially as a gypsies’ warning not to try and then fail with a second resolution.
If the last current act of the Security Council on Iraq is 1441, we can genuinely claim
that we have met Kofi’s call for unity and for acting within (our interpretation of) the
authority of the Security Council.”
154.  There was no reference in Mr Straw’s minute to President Chirac’s remarks the
previous evening.
155.  Mr Straw advised Mr Blair that it would not be possible to decide what the
Parliamentary Labour Party and the House of Commons would agree until deliberations
in the Security Council had concluded. If a second resolution was agreed, it would be
“fine”, but that was “unlikely”. He added:
“I sensed yesterday that sentiment might be shifting our way; but we would need to
be very clear of the result before putting down a resolution approving military action.
We could not possibly countenance the risk of a defeat …
“But it need not be a disaster for you, the Government, and even more important for
our troops, if we cannot take an active part in the initial invasion, provided we get on
the front foot with our strategy.
“I am aware of all the difficulties of the UK standing aside from invasion operations,
not least given the level of integration of our forces with those of the US. But I
understand that the US could if necessary adjust their plan rapidly to cope without
us … [W]e could nevertheless offer them a major UK contribution to the overall
campaign. In addition to staunch political support, this would include:
intelligence co-operation;
use of Diego Garcia, Fairford and Cyprus, subject to the usual consultation on
targeting; and
428
Previous page | Contents | Next page