Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
Council, which there was not; and if there was an unreasonable veto from one country,
when three Permanent Members were opposed to his policy – Mr Blair replied:
“… resolution 1441 … stated in terms … that if Iraq continued in material breach,
defined as not co-operating fully, immediately and unconditionally, serious
consequences would follow. All we are asking for in the second resolution is the
clear ultimatum that if Saddam continues to fail to co-operate, force would be used.
The French position is that France will vote no, whatever the circumstances. Those
are not my words, but those of the French President. I find it sad that at this point in
time he cannot support us in the position we have set out, which is the only sure way
to disarm Saddam.”
914.  Addressing the conclusion which “any tyrannical regime” might take from the
“world’s diplomatic dance with Saddam Hussein” over the previous 12 years, Mr Blair
stated that such a conclusion would be:
“That our capacity to pass firm resolutions was only matched by our feebleness
in implementing them. That is why this indulgence has to stop – because it is
dangerous: dangerous if such regimes disbelieve us; dangerous if they think they
can use our weakness … and dangerous because one day they will mistake our
innate revulsion against war for permanent incapacity, when in fact, if pushed to the
limit, we will act. But when we act, after years of pretence, the action will have to be
harder, bigger, more total in its impact. It is true that Iraq is not the only country with
weapons of mass destruction, but … to back away from this confrontation now, and
future conflicts will be infinitely worse and more devastating in their effects.
“… any fair observer does not really dispute that Iraq is in breach of resolution 1441
or that it implies action in such circumstances. The real problem is that, underneath,
people dispute that Iraq is a threat, dispute the link between terrorism and weapons
of mass destruction, and dispute, in other words, the whole basis of our assertion
that the two together constitute a fundamental assault on our way of life.”
915.  Arguing that the time had come to act, Mr Blair set out why he believed, in the
context of “an ever more interdependent” world where the threat was “chaos and
disorder”, Iraq posed a threat that was “so serious and why we must tackle it”.
916.  In his view, there were:
“… two begetters of chaos: tyrannical regimes with weapons of mass destruction
and extreme terrorist groups who profess a perverted and false sense of Islam.”
917.  Mr Blair set out his concerns about:
proliferators of nuclear equipment or expertise;
“dictatorships with highly repressive regimes” who were “desperately trying to
acquire” chemical, biological or “particularly, nuclear weapons capability”; some
564
Previous page | Contents | Next page