Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
The enemies of the US would be “eager to use biological or chemical, or a
nuclear weapon”, and it “must not ignore the threat”: “Facing clear evidence of
peril, we cannot wait for the final proof – the smoking gun – that could come in
the form of a mushroom cloud.”
Security Council open debate, 16 and 17 October 2002
41.  In his statement on 17 October, during an open debate on Iraq, Sir Jeremy
Greenstock, UK Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York,
emphasised the reliability of the intelligence on which the UK analysis of Iraq’s
capabilities was based.
42.  The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) asked on 10 October for an “emergency open
debate on the situation in Iraq”.12
43.  An open debate of the Council, attended by more than 50 Member States or
Permanent Observers, in addition to the members of the Security Council, took place
on 16 and 17 October.13
44.  In his statement on 17 October, Sir Jeremy Greenstock set out the UK position.
In relation to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction he stated:
“We remain deeply perturbed by evidence that Iraq believes it can hide its weapons
of mass destruction rather than declare them, that it can again fool the inspectors
and play games with them. The United Kingdom analysis, backed by reliable
intelligence, indicates that Iraq still possesses chemical and biological materials, has
continued to produce them, has sought to weaponise them, and has active military
plans for the deployment of such weapons. The United Kingdom analysis, backed
up by reliable intelligence, shows that Iraq has in recent years tried to buy multiple
components relevant to the production of a nuclear bomb. The United Kingdom
analysis, backed by reliable intelligence, points to the retention of extended-range
missiles and to the employment of hundreds of people in projects to develop
weapons with a range of over 1,000 kilometres that could carry both weapons of
mass destruction and conventional warheads.
“It would be an abdication of responsibility to ignore this challenge to the
international community …”
12  UN Security Council, ‘Letter dated 10 October 2002 from the Permanent Representative of South Africa
to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council’ (S/2002/1132).
13  UN Security Council, ‘4625th Meeting Wednesday 16 October 2002’ (S/PV.4625, S/PV.4625
Resumption 1); UN Security Council, ‘4625th Meeting Thursday 17 October 2002’ (S/PV.4625, S/PV.4625
Resumption 2, S/PV.4625 Resumption 3).
298
Previous page | Contents | Next page