Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
83.  As Lord Goldsmith’s subsequent advice confirmed, whether a specific failure
to comply with the requirements placed upon Iraq by the resolution would amount
to a material breach would have to be judged in the particular circumstances of
Iraq’s response.
84.  On 25 November, the House of Commons debated resolution 1441 (2002) and the
Government motion:
“That this House supports UNSCR 1441 as unanimously adopted by the UN
Security Council; agrees that the Government of Iraq must comply fully with all
provisions of the resolution; and agrees that, if it fails to do so, the Security Council
should meet in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance.”17
85.  Mr Straw’s draft opening statement was sent to No.10 for comment. Mr Powell
questioned two points in the text:
a statement that the UK would prefer a second resolution, which Mr Powell
described as “not our position up to now”; and
that we didn’t “absolutely need one [a second resolution]”, which Mr Powell
commented would “force the Attorney General to break cover”.18
86.  Mr Blair commented that he did not “see this as such a problem”.19
87.  In his opening speech, Mr Straw set out the inspection process and the answers
to four “key questions” which arose from the resolution:
What constituted a material breach? Mr Straw referred to operative paragraph 4
of the resolution, but went on to say: “As with any definition of that type, it is
never possible to give an exhaustive list of all the conceivable behaviours
that it covers. That judgement has to be made against the real circumstances
that arise, but I reassure the House that material breach means something
significant: some behaviour or pattern of behaviour that is serious. Among such
breaches could be action by the Government of Iraq seriously to obstruct or
impede the inspectors, to intimidate witnesses, or a pattern of behaviour where
any single action appears relatively minor but the actions as a whole add up to
something deliberate and more significant: something that shows Iraq’s intention
not to comply.”20
Who would decide what happened if there was a material breach? Mr Straw
argued that if a “material breach” was reported to the Security Council, “the
decision on whether there had been a material breach will effectively have been
17 House of Commons, Official Report, 25 November 2002, column 47.
18 Email Powell to Manning, 23 November 2002, ‘Jack’s Iraq Statement’.
19 Manuscript comment Blair on Email Powell to Manning, 23 November 2002, ‘Jack’s Iraq Statement’.
20 House of Commons, Official Report, 25 November 2002, column 51.
18
Previous page | Contents | Next page