3.8 |
Development of UK strategy and options, 8 to 20 March
2003
927.
In his speech,
Mr Duncan Smith stated that the official Opposition would
support
the
Government because it was acting “in the national
interest”.328
Iraq posed
a threat
to the
safety and stability of the Middle East and Saddam Hussein had “the
means,
the mentality
and the motive to pose a direct threat to our national
security”.
928.
Other points
made by Mr Duncan Smith included:
•
Saddam
Hussein was “in complete breach of all his obligations to the
United
Kingdom and
to the international community”.
•
He had
“absolutely no intention whatsoever of relinquishing the weapons”
he
had
developed.
•
The threat
from Iraq’s “arsenal to British citizens at home and abroad”
could
not “simply
be contained. Whether in the hands of his regime or in the
hands
of the
terrorists to whom he would give his weapons, they pose a clear
danger
to British
citizens.”
•
Saddam
Hussein’s “last hope” was “to string along the international
community
for as long
as possible”, and to delay action until the autumn, and, “in
the
meantime”,
his “prevarication and games” would “split the
international
community
and wreck the UN”.
•
There were
“pressing questions” about the arrangements for dealing with
the
humanitarian
consequences of military action.
•
If
“decisive action” had been taken earlier, “we would not now stand
on the
verge of
war”.
929.
Mr Duncan
Smith concluded that, if the House of Commons voted to
give
Saddam Hussein:
“… yet
another chance, the moment will pass, our concentration will
falter,
our energy
and focus will disperse and our nerve will fail, with
disastrous
consequences …
“… We
should stand firm, act and show that we have learned from past
failures …”
930.
The Speaker
selected a cross-party amendment to the Government motion,
moved
by
Mr Peter Kilfoyle (Labour), which stated that the
House:
“… believes
that the case for war against Iraq has not yet been
established,
especially
given the absence of specific United Nations authorisation; but, in
the
event that
hostilities do commence, pledges its total support for the British
forces
engaged in
the Middle East …”329
931.
In his speech
supporting the amendment, Mr Kilfoyle argued that military
action
would be
“illegal, immoral and illogical”. Saddam Hussein had been
contained; there was
328
House of
Commons, Official
Report, 18 March
2003, columns 774-779.
329
House of
Commons, Official
Report, 18 March
2003, column 779.
567