1.1 | UK
Iraq strategy 1990 to 2000
as a last
resort” when Iraq “seriously violates its obligations, and when all
diplomatic
means have
been exhausted”. But, “that would be a decision for the Security
Council”.
Instead
“without such a decision”, military action had been taken while the
Council were
meeting in
informal consultations. Sweden regretted the attacks and the
consequences
they might
have for civilians in Iraq, and the “fact that the Security Council
has been
presented
with a fait accompli”. It feared that the strikes would “not be of
much help
in getting
the inspections going again” when the “Council’s overriding aim
must remain
to rid Iraq
of its programmes” for developing weapons of mass
destruction.
689.
Mr Mahugu
reiterated Kenya’s position that “any decision to take further
action
against
Iraq remains the sole responsibility of the Security Council”, and
that it was
“difficult
to understand the reason’s for today’s attack”. The reports to the
Council did not
“in any way
indicate that UNSCOM suffered a total lack of
co-operation”.
“Any
decision taken to force compliance by Iraq with resolutions without
the
Council’s
prior authority … is contrary to the spirit and purpose of those
very
resolutions,
because it also deprived the Council of an opportunity to
analyse
the reports
… and to take a collective decision on them.”
691.
Brazil,
France, Gabon, Gambia and Portugal each adopted a more
equivocal
position.
692.
Mr Amorim
deplored the fact that circumstances had led to the use of force,
but
also stated
that, when the use of force was contemplated, it “should take place
within
a multilateral
framework”.
693.
Mr Mamour
Jagne, Gambian Permanent Representative to the UN, stated that
the
die was
cast, but Gambia “would like to see the unity of the Council
restored”. If it was
not, the
Council’s primary responsibility for maintaining international
peace and security
would be
“seriously impaired”.
694.
Mr Dejammet
stated that France:
•
deplored
“the chain of events that led to American military strikes … and
the
serious
human consequences that they may have”;
•
regretted
that Iraqi leaders had not been “able to demonstrate the spirit of
full
co‑operation”
called for by the February MOU; and
•
thanked
Mr Annan and supported his “tireless and persistent actions to
ensure
that the
law prevails, despite the obstacles and pitfalls
encountered”.
695.
Sir Jeremy
Greenstock told the Inquiry:
153