The Government know that people are concerned about the possibility of military action against Iraq. So are they, and they are trying to avoid war. None of us wants military action. But the onus must be on the Iraqi regime, in accordance with United Nations Security Council resolution 1441 and previous resolutions. The regime must co-operate fully and actively with the UN. So far, it has not done so.
We have at all stages during the crisis considered the options carefully with our allies, taking account of the circumstances, such as the potential wider impact on the region, and the need to act in accordance with international law. We shall continue to take full account of these considerations.
Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have been central to Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship since the 1980s. He has amassed poisons, viruses and bacteria and pursued a nuclear weapons capability, in flagrant disregard of United Nations Security Council resolutions (UNSCRs) and Iraq’s obligations as a non-nuclear weapon state under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The regime’s illegal weapons programme has continued since it forced the UN weapons inspectors to leave in 1998. In contravention of UNSCRs, Iraq is developing ballistic missiles capable of delivering these weapons to targets throughout the Middle East and even in south-east Europe. All this is set out in the detailed paper that we published in September.
Of course, other countries do have similar capabilities. But two things single out Iraq: the unambiguous obligations imposed by the Security Council to disarm and Saddam Hussein’s willingness to use WMD. No other country in modern times has used chemical weapons against its neighbours or killed 5,000 of its own civilians and injured 10,000 more, as the Iraqi regime did in Halabja in 1988.
This deadly combination of capability and intent makes the Iraqi regime uniquely dangerous. Saddam Hussein’s pursuit of these weapons has been at the heart of the UN’s stand-off with Iraq for the past 12 years.
Four months ago, the international community took decisive action to tackle the threat. The UN Security Council unanimously sent the Iraqi regime an uncompromising message: co-operate fully with weapons inspectors or face disarmament by force. UNSCR 1441 gives Iraq one final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations, by giving up once and for all its WMD and the means to deliver them. The burden was placed squarely on Iraq to make an immediate, full and honest declaration of its WMD holdings. The role of the weapons inspectors is to verify declarations and monitor subsequent compliance. The Security Council has not employed them as adetective agency tasked with ensuring Iraqi disarmament via a combination of ingenuity and strong arm tactics. The inspectors are there to provide the assurance that Iraq is complying with its obligations.
It is clear from recent briefings by the weapons inspectors that Iraq’s co-operation has been neither full nor immediate.
As part of resolution 1441, Iraq had to produce an accurate, full and complete declaration of its weapons programmes. But Iraq’s declaration in December, almost 12,000 pages, was a clear attempt to confuse and hinder analysis. The weapons inspectors criticised it for not answering outstanding questions. The most recent document released by the inspectors, the so-called clusters of outstanding issues, catalogues Iraqi evasion and deceit, of feigning co-operation while in reality pursuing a cynical policy of concealment (www.unmovic.com). The document details at least 29 instances of Iraqi failure to provide credible evidence, and at least 17 occasions when inspectors uncovered evidence that contradicted the official Iraqi account.
Iraq has not accounted for the thousands of tonnes of chemical and biological weapons materials left unaccounted for when the regime forced the weapons inspectors to leave in 1998. Iraq was asked to provide a list of personnel involved in prohibited programmes in the past. Its list of 400 names is in stark contrast to the inspectors’ records of 3,500 personnel. The restrictions the regime has placed on the few interviews inside Iraq provide the most incriminating evidence that Iraq has something to hide. The regime’s tactics have been to deny the existence of WMD and, if caught out, to offer the smallest concession possible in order to work for delay. In the case of the Al Samoud missiles, the regime under-declared the number of missile engines it had illegally imported (131, instead of 380), falsely declared that the missile had a maximum range of 150 kilometres when it was in fact designed to fly considerably in excess of that, and is now destroying the missiles very slowly.
It is not a question of increasing the numbers of weapons inspectors or of allowing more time for Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime to bring themselves into compliance. What is needed is an irreversible and strategic decision by Iraq to disarm, and all the relevant information which it could and should have given in the last 12 years - a strategic decision like that taken by South Africa when it decided freely to abandon its secret nuclear weapons programme. And we know that, when he wants to, Saddam Hussein can act with astonishing speed. Of course, were the regime to co-operate in this way, the weapons inspectors would need more time to complete their work, to verify the disarmament.
UNSCR 1441 provides that, if the Iraqi regime refuses to co-operate and comply, the Security Council will convene immediately to consider the situation. No one should be in doubt that any movement Iraq has so far made is a result only of pressure from the UN and the credible threat of force. As the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, has said, if Iraq does not comply, the Security Council will have to face up to its responsibilities. To find a peaceful solution to the current crisis the Council must not retreat from the demands it set out clearly in 1441.
The Prime Minister has made clear that prudent preparations and planning are required in case force proves necessary. But the UK does not want war, and never has. Through the UN we are keeping up the pressure on the regime to comply. If military action does prove necessary, huge efforts will be made to ensure that the suffering of the Iraqi people is as limited as possible. And we will have put an end to the far greater torment and killing which will otherwise be perpetuated by the Iraqi regime.
delicious
digg
facebook
