Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.8  |  Development of UK strategy and options, 8 to 20 March 2003
unilateral action but by multilateral agreement and a world governed by rules. Yet
tonight the international partnerships most important to us are weakened … Those
are heavy casualties in a war in which a shot has yet to be fired.”
855.  Dismissing any parallels with the action in Kosovo in 1999, where there had been
multilateral support and the need to respond to an urgent and compelling humanitarian
crisis, Mr Cook stated:
“Our difficulty in getting support this time is that neither the international community
nor the British public is persuaded that there is an urgent and compelling reason for
this military action in Iraq.
“The threshold for war should always be high. None of us can predict the death toll
of civilians …”
856.  Mr Cook continued:
“Nor is it fair to accuse those of us who want longer for inspections of not having
an alternative strategy … Over the past decade that strategy [of containment] had
destroyed more weapons than in the Gulf War, dismantled Iraq’s nuclear weapons
programme and halted Saddam’s medium and long range missile programmes.”
Iraq’s military strength was now less than half its size in 1991; and, “Ironically” it was
“only because Iraq’s military forces” were “so weak that we can even contemplate
its invasion”.
857.  Mr Cook questioned the threat posed by Iraq:
“Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood
sense of the term – namely a credible device capable of being delivered against
a strategic city target. It probably … has biological toxins and battlefield chemical
munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam
anthrax agents and the then British government approved chemical and munitions
factories. Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a
military capacity that has been there for twenty years, and which we helped to
create? Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam’s ambition to
complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors?”
858.  Drawing attention to the lack of action in the face of Israel’s refusal to comply with
resolution 242 (1967) demanding its withdrawal from the Occupied Territories, Mr Cook
warned of the “strong sense of injustice throughout the Muslim world” as a result of the
perception that there was “one rule for the allies of the US and another rule for the rest”.
He added:
“Nor is our credibility helped by the appearance that our partners in Washington
are less interested in disarmament than they are in regime change in Iraq. That
551
Previous page | Contents | Next page