Previous page | Contents | Next page
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
Previous page | Contents | Next page