Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
The US had “committed flagrant and gross violations of Iraq’s sovereignty and
territorial integrity”, including “imposing an illegal air siege” and openly declaring
“criminal schemes against Iraq by allocating funds to finance illegal activities
aimed at intervening in Iraq’s internal affairs to commit acts of sabotage and
terrorism”.
Since May 1998, Iraq had been calling on the Security Council, the Secretary-
General and the international community to “adopt a fair and firm position”.
Iraq’s “serious and sincere statements” had remained “unheeded” and the
Special Commission had “refused to endorse officially the substantive facts
about Iraq’s compliance”.
The US had “rejected” the recent proposals to the Security Council to “move the
nuclear item from the status of disarmament to that of monitoring”.
550.  Iraq concluded that the “current circumstances” confirmed that Iraq would “always
be under siege regardless of what it does, and regardless of its fulfilment of the Security
Council’s requirements”.
551.  Mr Aziz forwarded the decision in a letter to the President of the Security Council
on 5 August.221
552.  Mr Aziz stated that the Special Commission:
“… had refused to inform the Security Council of the substantive facts … Instead,
the Special Commission has continued its old and well-known methods of
concentrating on details of no value with respect to the requirements of section C
of resolution 687 (1991). It has also continued with its methods of raising marginal
issues, to confuse and mislead the Council and world public opinion into thinking
that those issues are of some importance with respect to the requirements of
disarmament. In addition, it has attempted to conjure up the crises and provocations
which characterized the work of the Special Commission throughout the past years.
The purpose of this was entirely clear, namely to perpetuate the embargo pursuant
to the policy of the United States of America.”
553.  Mr Aziz set out in detail Iraq’s position on UNSCOM’s approach to the agreed work
programme and his meeting with Mr Butler on 3 August. The points made by Mr Aziz
included:
The Special Commission teams discussing missiles had raised “trivial”
or “marginal” additional questions, rather than focusing on the fact of the
destruction of special warheads and Iraq’s lack of success in producing engines
and gyroscopes for ballistic missiles.
Iraq had “proved that the material balance for R400 bombs was complete”.
221  UN Security Council, 14 August 1998, ‘Letter dated 5 August 1998 from the Deputy Prime Minister of
Iraq addressed to the President of the Security Council’ (S/1998/718).
124
Previous page | Contents | Next page