| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Iraq
11 am
Mr. Michael Howard (Folkestone and Hythe) (by private notice): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on recent events in Iraq.
The Minister for the Armed Forces (Dr. John Reid): Saddam Hussein is continuing to defy the clearly expressed will of the United Nations and the international community by refusing to allow the UN Special Commission--UNSCOM--to carry out weapons inspections and, now, by expelling UN personnel.
It is essential for that region and for the rest of the world that UNSCOM should be allowed to carry out its work. We know that Saddam Hussein still has the capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction. UNSCOM is crucial to ensuring that they are all destroyed.
It is clear that Saddam Hussein has misjudged the will of the United Nations. Security Council unanimity was once more demonstrated yesterday in a further presidential statement. The British Government are determined to stand firm against Saddam Hussein. We know that he is a dictator who has demonstrated a total lack of interest in the welfare of his own Iraqi people. He has shown by his past actions and history that he is a threat to regional peace and security.
The Government are consulting closely with other members of the Security Council to explore to the full diplomatic means of resolving the situation. The Foreign Secretary met the US Secretary of State, Mrs. Albright, in Edinburgh this morning to discuss the position. We remain hopeful that Saddam Hussein will realise that co-operation with UNSCOM is the only way for Iraq to progress towards a lifting of sanctions.
As a sensible precautionary measure, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence yesterday decided to move HMS Invincible from the Caribbean to the Mediterranean. Today, he has decided to reduce the notice to move of Harrier GR7 attack aircraft from 1 Squadron from five days to 48 hours, effective from Monday. I stress that it is a sensible precautionary measure. No decision has been taken to deploy Harriers or to move Invincible to the Gulf. We continue to support diplomatic measures and we trust that there will be a sensible response from Saddam Hussein.
Mr. Howard:
I am grateful to the Minister for his reply. I assure him and the House that the Government will continue to have the Opposition's full support for the position that they have taken.
Will the Minister confirm that it is the United Nations and the world community, not the United States, who are being defied by the Iraqi dictatorship and that what is at stake is access by one of the world's most evil regimes to weapons of mass destruction? While we all hope that it may still be possible to resolve this crisis by diplomatic means, will the hon. Gentleman confirm that force has not been ruled out? Will he further confirm that Security Council resolution 687 provides sufficient authority for military action to be taken if necessary, without any further resolution by the Security Council?
Finally, what can the hon. Gentleman tell the House about the readiness of the United Kingdom to play its part in enforcing the Security Council resolution?
Dr. Reid:
I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman. I confirm his comments on Saddam Hussein's defiance, not of any individual country, but, through the United Nations, of the whole international community. The right hon. and learned Gentleman correctly pointed to the evil nature of the Iraqi regime. We do not need to study the books or the crystal ball to know that--it is in our historical experience. I agree with him about the nature of the threat resulting from the expelling of UNSCOM. It is not a formal United Nations presence in Iraq; it is a vital instrument in maintaining a careful watch over, and probing further into, the holding of terrible weapons--biological, chemical and other--of potential mass destruction.
I assure the right hon. and learned Gentleman that we are doing everything to achieve and support a diplomatic solution. This morning, the Foreign Secretary agreed with Mrs. Albright the need for a diplomatic solution. Therefore, I stress that the carrier move and the Harrier move, of which I have just informed the House, are sensible precautionary measures within the context of the Government's support for a diplomatic solution.
Force is not ruled out, of course. We are not ruling out any options, including military, but we hope for a diplomatic solution. We have acted throughout within the ambit and on the express will and legitimacy of the previous UN resolutions. It is absolutely essential for purposes not only of legality, but of international morality and the widest possible political support that we do that. I assure the right hon. and learned Gentleman that we will continue to do that.
Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East):
Are any other members of the Gulf war coalition, apart from the United States and ourselves, taking similar sensible precautionary measures?
Dr. Reid:
I cannot give my hon. Friend details of what other measures are being taken. I assume that our colleagues--especially permanent members of the Security Council--are involved at all levels in our efforts, primarily public and diplomatic. However, I hope and expect that sensible measures, other than diplomatic, are being taken by all those who wish to be prepared for every and any contingency.
Mr. Peter Brooke (Cities of London and Westminster):
Will the Minister accept at least my congratulations on the fact that the lessons we learned about dictators more than 60 years ago have not been forgotten by the Government in the way that they seem to have been mislaid by some of our allies?
Dr. Reid:
We would wish to stress at the moment the unanimity with which our allies are approaching the matter. We all come from different experiences and individual national positions. Thus far, there has been unanimity. We wish to ensure that any future action has the widest political support, whether on a diplomatic or any other basis.
As I said in answer to the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard), we have always operated within the ambit and on the basis
of the UN resolutions. Perhaps I should make it clearer than I did previously that those resolutions already validate the use of force under such circumstances.
Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark, North and Bermondsey):
May I thank the Minister for coming to the House and assure him that all that he has said this morning has the complete support of the Liberal Democrats? It is imperative that UNSCOM be allowed to continue its work because it has already regularly found stockpiles of the sort of hugely dangerous weapons of war and destruction that the hon. Gentleman mentioned. We know that the Iraqi Government have used chemical and biological weapons as part of their dictatorship apparatus and activity, and are therefore able to use them again. The UN needs to be supported and it is quite right that our forces and warships are put at its disposal so that it may be back in operation in Iraq, rooting out those weapons, at the earliest opportunity.
Dr. Reid:
I thank the hon. Gentleman for the points that he makes. He reinforces the point--of which I think the British people will and should be aware--that it is not a matter of some formal imposition as a result of abstract United Nations resolutions. UNSCOM's work and the measures taken by the United Nations are absolutely vital if we are to ensure that weapons of mass destruction with terrible, terrible consequences are, first, identified and, secondly, disposed of.
I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree that it is worrying that more than two weeks have elapsed since the Iraqis' decision to withdraw their co-operation with US UNSCOM personnel. It is clear that Iraq has moved weapons of mass destruction and equipment during that period, making UNSCOM's task that much more difficult when it resumes its activities. Even one or two weeks can make a dreadful difference in such circumstances.
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Southwark, North and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) for highlighting that point and for the support shown by him and by the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe. They have expressed not only to the British people but to Saddam Hussein the fact that we are committed--first through diplomatic and every other measure that we can employ--to ensuring that those weapons of mass destruction never again threaten either the region or any other part of the world.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover):
Does my hon. Friend agree that if the narrowly based coalition decides to attack Iraq, the chances of hitting the tyrant Saddam are very small, but that the chances of inflicting death on innocent people, women and kids in Iraq are very high? I note his desire to continue with some form of diplomacy, but will he consider another possibility? When United Nations forces have been sent to other areas on previous occasions, it has sometimes been specified that certain countries should not send component parts of that force. Everyone agrees that one of the problems behind the latest decision by Saddam was that there were too many Americans in the inspection team. Before people are slaughtered, would it not be a good idea to call his bluff, and to consider the proposition that there are other
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |