The Report of the Iraq Inquiry

355. Sir John Weston stated that the “incidents described” in Mr Butler’s report of

6 October, and his inability to advise the Council that Iraq was “in substantial compliance

with the demands of resolution 1115”, were “adequate justification to move forward from

the decision” taken by the Council in June.

356. Sir John added:

“We shall regret it if a few Council members, for whatever reasons of their own,

are unable to subscribe to this view. We have worked hard and in good faith to

accommodate all members’ preoccupations on the text. But we were not willing

to compromise the underlying purpose of the resolution or the responsibilities

of the … Council in order to appease Iraq …”

357. Sir John also stated that Saddam Hussein had to take “the political decision

to co‑operate fully” with UNSCOM, and that:

“The regularity with which this Council has had to address this issue confirms that

this decision has still not been taken. All we have heard from the Iraqi regime for the

past six and [a] half years are lies and empty promises, while on the ground they

have actively obstructed the Special Commission and concealed from it details of

its illegal weapons programmes. These facts are borne out in the latest report of

the Special Commission, which clearly states that, while progress has been made,

serious deficiencies remain in all three weapons areas, in particular on chemical and

biological warfare agents.”

358. Sir John concluded that, “until and unless” Iraq co-operated and told “the whole

truth”, there could be “no prospect of the Council considering whether the demands

of Section C of … resolution 687 (1991)” had been met. He also referred to Iraq’s failure

to meet its obligations in relation to missing Kuwaiti prisoners of war and property.

359. Ambassador Bill Richardson, US Permanent Representative to the UN, stated

that the Baghdad regime was the only party “responsible for this very sad state of

affairs”, and that it was refusing “to meet its most basic obligations, such as allowing

UNSCOM inspectors to carry out their Security Council mandate without obstruction

or harassment”. Mr Butler’s report recorded “a litany of Iraqi harassment, obfuscation,

obstruction and deception”. Iraq had explained its actions by attacking the credibility of

UNSCOM and questioning its judgement, and when that did not work, resorting to “time

honoured tactics of bullying, burning and blackmailing”.

360. Ambassador Richardson added:

“Compliance with international obligations is not a voluntary act. Co-operation

is not a matter of degree. Either Iraq is in compliance … or it is in breach of

those obligations.”

361. Ambassador Richardson challenged the description of Iraq’s “so-called

co-operation over the past six months”, which was “too little, too late”.

88