Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Senator John Kerry and Iraq.
Senator John Kerry
Asked if the Prime Minister had ever met Senator John Kerry, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said he didn’t know. He pointed out that the Prime Minister and Mr Kerry had hoped to have a meeting during the Prime Minister’s recent visit to Washington, but unfortunately Mr Kerry had been out of town on the day.
Iraq
Asked if the Prime Minister would agree with Robin Cook’s suggestion last week that British troops were being placed under more risk as a result of the Prime Minister’s reluctance to distance the UK’s position on Iraq from that of the US, the PMOS said that as he had told journalists this morning, it was important to understand what it was we were in Iraq to do. We were not there for the sake of either UK or US diplomacy or to score points off each other. We were there to achieve a stable democracy. That meant having an agreed coherent strategy for the way forward. This was not a US strategy or a British strategy. It was a Coalition strategy which went with the grain of Iraqi opinion and reflected their concerns. The question was how best to achieve it. Was it through playing to the gallery, grandstanding or airing differences in public, which would give the Iraqis and our troops on the frontline conflicting messages? Or should it be done by focussing on reaching an agreed policy. In the Prime Minister’s firm view, it was the latter course which would best achieve our shared objective - handing over power to the Iraqi people as quickly as possible and allowing them to develop a stable democracy. Asked if he was insinuating that he would not brief on any serious disagreements between the British Government and US Administration were there to be any, the PMOS said that as Sir Jeremy Greenstock had underlined in his Today Programme interview this morning, the US and the British systems were working more closely in Iraq than they had ever done before. Obviously different options would have to be debated from time to time both within and between the two countries’ systems. That was a natural part of forming a coherent policy. The question was whether that was best done in the full glare of publicity or privately without the benefit of megaphone diplomacy.
In answer to further questions, the PMOS said that it was important for journalists not to get carried away by misconceptions regarding the nature of what we were and were not about. We were not about scoring UK v US performances. What we were about was achieving our joint goal, namely a stable Iraqi democracy.
Asked if the Prime Minister believed that the Leader of the Opposition was being unpatriotic by criticising the Government for not being more open about any disagreements with the US, the PMOS said that as a Civil Servant he was unable to comment on party political issues. As a general point, however, the Government believed that it was in the national interest, and those serving the national interest, that we preserved a united front and thought through the policy together. Put to him that the desire to preserve a united front laid the UK open to persistent claims that it was Washington’s poodle, the PMOS said that it obviously depended on how you looked at the question. For example, critics sitting in London, Washington or wherever would see things differently to someone like Sir Jeremy Greenstock who had been at the sharp end in Iraq and therefore saw quite clearly what our goal was.
delicious
digg
facebook
