House of Commons Hansard Debates for 25 Nov 1998 (pt 12)

Mr. Dalyell rose--

Mr. Campbell-Savours: I would like to give way to my hon. Friend, but I am conscious of the time.

I want to move the debate on, to the position of the Iraqi National Congress and what has happened in Washington. As my hon. Friend the Member for Kelvin knows, $95 million has been allocated to the INC for operations. The Americans have managed to find a way to justify that within their constitutional and legal arrangements. Congress has enacted legislation and has found a way. It recognises that the use of those weapons would inevitably undermine the regime in Baghdad, which must be the preoccupation and objective of all of us. The question is, what is the British position on the matter?

My hon. Friend the Member for Kelvin set out a perfectly reasonable argument, outlining the international legal framework as he understands it, which in his view prohibits the INC in the United Kingdom from being involved in particular exercises overseas. I want it to be involved in such exercises. I want the Baghdad regime to be brought down. I believe that the civilised nations of the world have a responsibility to break down a dictator who threatens international stability and, in particular, stability in the middle east.

Without wanting to criticise my right hon. Friend the Minister--I support the Government's position, as he knows--I want to know why the Americans are prepared to be a little more robust than the British in the way in which they advocate their support for INC activities. We seem invariably to use the terminology, "It is not our role to be involved in bringing down a foreign leader." I think that we have a responsibility, and I want us to take a more robust position.

Finally, on sanctions busting, which I mentioned recently, I do not understand why we cannot block oil exports to Turkey from Baghdad by lorry. Information on those freight movements is well documented and those revenues, along with those secured by the sale of oil through Shatt al 'Arab and the port of Dubai, are funding the regime in Baghdad. I cannot see how it would be possible for Saddam Hussein to survive if those revenues were cut off. That is another approach, and we should be adopting it.

My hon. Friend the Member for Kelvin spoke eloquently for 50 minutes but, despite promises, did not offer us a way forward that would resolve the crisis, apart from suggesting that certain UNSCOM officials should be removed. That was his only recommendation.

Mr. Galloway: That is not true. My hon. Friend cannot have been listening.

Mr. Campbell-Savours: I listened carefully to my hon. Friend's speech, and that was the only recommendation that

25 Nov 1998 : Column 159

I could identify. I do not believe that it will resolve the problem. We need to be far more robust and to take positive action.

12.3 pm

Mr. Keith Vaz (Leicester, East): I think I am the only Member of Parliament who was born in a country in the Arab world--Yemen--and I simply want to make a brief point to my right hon. Friend the Minister of State. Will he assure the House that he has had the fullest possible consultation with our allies in the Gulf?

I recently returned from a visit to Bahrain, where some of the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Kelvin (Mr. Galloway) were related to me informally--obviously, the formal position remains that all the Gulf countries fully support the actions that are to be taken by the United Kingdom. However, the House and the rest of the Arab world should be assured that we are consulting our allies and keeping them informed of what is happening, and that we will take no action unless we have their support.

There is a view that we are acting on our own, without consulting others. It is important for the Minister to use this opportunity to reassert the fact that we are going with the co-operation of countries that have always shown Britain good will and which want to continue to trade and invest in Britain and to remain our firmest and strongest allies.

12.4 pm

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): On the final point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours), about stopping lorries crossing the Turkish border, the economy of Jordan is entirely dependent on the oil lorries, which go all the way from the Iraqi oilfields to Oman. The Iraqis sell the oil to Jordan at 60 per cent. of cost. The Jordanian economy refines it and pays in kind. It is entirely geared to what happens in Iraq. Therefore, there will be real problems with stopping the oil lorries.

As it is more important that the House hears the Minister than hears me, I shall make one request, which is that, before any military action is taken, a group of American and British officials should at least go to Baghdad to talk in depth to people such as Dr. Riyadh al Quasi. Many points of fact are in dispute. I understand many of the difficulties, not least with Israel, but one hears Iraqis say that there is a synagogue in Baghdad although there is not one in a number of other Arab states. I realise that the Jewish community there may be small and ancient.

There are many matters to be discussed--and before any precipitate military action is taken, for God's sake let us send a delegation, preferably with some Arab speakers, to talk things through properly.

12.6 pm

Mr. Michael Howard (Folkestone and Hythe): I congratulate the hon. Member for Glasgow, Kelvin (Mr. Galloway) on obtaining this debate. It is even more timely today than it might have appeared to be when he applied for it. He made a powerful speech. At the heart

25 Nov 1998 : Column 160

of his position is concern for the future of the Iraqi people. That is a proper cause and basis for anxiety, but it is a concern shared by the international community and reflected in the fact that, notwithstanding the sanctions imposed on the Iraqi regime, it has the facility to sell $10 billion of oil a year with which to finance the purchase of food and medicine for the Iraqi people. Alas, it is not a concern shared by that regime. As my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition said, Saddam Hussein chooses instead to spend that money

"on weapons of war and the luxurious life style of his entourage".--[Official Report, 16 November 1998; Vol. 319, c. 611.]

The concern of the international community--and, I have no doubt, that of the hon. Gentleman as well--for humanity does not stop at the borders of Iraq. What lies at the heart of the anguished consideration that so many people have so often given to the questions that arise as a result of the activities of the Iraqi regime is concern for the people in the region as a whole, as well as and including the people of Iraq. We are dealing with a regime that has proved itself capable of the most brutal treatment both of its citizens and of others--a regime that would not hesitate not only to manufacture but to use weapons of mass destruction. We are dealing with a regime that has played fast and loose with the international community. It is a regime that poses a direct threat to humanity. If Saddam Hussein gets his way, countless lives will be at risk. That is what lies at the heart of our concern.

There is no lack of evidence to support that concern. Last week, the Prime Minister referred to the question marks that remain over 610 tonnes of precursor chemicals for the nerve gas UX; over material capable of producing large amounts of anthrax; and over missile warheads designed for chemical and biological weapons. Contrary to Iraqi assurances, traces of UX have been found in missile warhead fragments.

Reference has been made to the recent Iraqi defector, Sami Salih. I think that the hon. Member for Kelvin acknowledged that he was well placed to testify to the intentions of the Iraqi regime. Sami Salih has said that the regime never had any intention of complying with the terms of the United Nations resolutions on weapons inspections, and that he had seen

"missiles hidden all over Iraq".

Another recent defector, Abbas al-Janati, told the BBC last week that rocket launchers are constantly moved between sites to outwit the UNSCOM teams, and that an army brigade was dedicated to undertaking anti- UNSCOM measures. The threat is real and appalling, and it has to be met with resolve. That real and appalling threat justifies the action taken by the United States Government and Her Majesty's Government, and it makes the most recent breach of faith by the Iraqi regime a matter of acute apprehension.

Last week, the Prime Minister told the House:

"One of two things will now happen: either he"--

Saddam Hussein--

"will co-operate, in which case inspectors will do their job, or he will fail to co-operate and . . . force will follow."--[Official Report, 16 November 1998; Vol. 319, c. 612.]