1.1 | UK
Iraq strategy 1990 to 2000
destruction
of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction at an early date, so that
steps can be
taken to
lift the sanctions against Iraq at the earliest possible
date”.
485.
Mr Dejammet
welcomed the draft resolution and the confirmation of the
authority
of the MOU.
The resolution addressed a serious warning to Iraq about complying
with
its
obligations, but it also underscored “the prerogatives of the
Security Council in a way
that
excludes any question of automaticity”. It was:
“… the
Security Council that must evaluate the behaviour of a country, if
necessary
to
determine any possible violations, and to take the appropriate
decisions.”
486.
Mr Dejammet
concluded by paying tribute to Mr Annan’s achievements,
stating:
“Nothing
will be possible without the constant involvement of the
Secretary-General
in our work
and in our deliberations.”
487.
Speaking after
the vote, Ambassador Richardson stated that the US was
“deeply
grateful”
to Mr Annan for his:
“…
courageous and diligent efforts. Through his diplomacy, backed by
America’s
willingness
to use force, he has achieved what could be, if implemented fully
by Iraq,
a
breakthrough.”
488.
Ambassador
Richardson also expressed scepticism about whether, “after six
years
of broken
promises”, Iraq would live up to its words or the Security
Council’s demands.
The
resolution provided “for a new beginning for Iraq”; but the
“choice” was Iraq’s.
489.
Mr Lavrov
stated that Russia had “unswervingly striven to bring about
Iraq’s
complete
fulfilment of its obligations”, and that “the first step” would be
to lift the oil
embargo
once all Iraq’s “‘disarmament dossier’ issues have been dealt with
and moved
to the
long-term-monitoring stage”. As a result of Mr Annan’s
mission, there was “a real
opportunity
to speed up the process of achieving a comprehensive
settlement”.
490.
Russia’s main
goals were:
“… the need
for full elimination of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction,
maintaining
United
Nations monitoring in this field and avoiding the extremely
dangerous
consequences
for the entire region in the event of an uncontrolled
development
of the
situation.”
491.
Mr Lavrov
said that the resolution contained “a political warning to Iraq”,
“whereby
new
violations by that country will have extremely serious
consequences”, but:
“At the
same time, there has been full observance of the legal prerogatives
of the
Security
Council … The resolution clearly states that it is precisely the
Security
Council
which will directly ensure its implementation, including the
adoption
of
appropriate decisions. Therefore, any hint of automaticity with
regard to the
111