| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
18 Dec 2002 : Column 852—continued
Mr. Hoon: My hon. Friend puts his case with his customary passion—more passion than I am perhaps able to display. We have always made it clear that Saddam Hussein is a unique case, having not only invaded two neighbours but having used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. That is why the
overwhelming view of the international community is that it is necessary that Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq should be disarmed.
Dr. Jenny Tonge (Richmond Park): Remembering the experience of prisoners of war after the war in Afghanistan, will the Secretary of State tell us what plans he has to deal with Iraqi prisoners of war in the event of an attack?
Mr. Hoon: They will be dealt with in accordance with humanitarian and international law.
Donald Anderson (Swansea, East): The terms of the charter of vessels will surely be known in the markets fairly soon, if not now. What can my right hon. Friend tell the House about the earliest start date for those charters and the length of them? Which NATO allies, apart from the US, are also involving themselves in prudent planning?
Mr. Hoon: Again, for reasons that I have set out, I cannot give the House precise details of either the start date of any charters or their length. All I can say is that we are involved in contingency preparations to ensure that vessels are available should their use be required. No decisions have yet been taken on their use. As far as other countries are concerned, I am sure that all responsible members of the Security Council and the UN will want to take appropriate action to ensure the enforcement of Security Council resolution 1441.
Patrick Mercer (Newark): Will the Secretary of State confirm that the Armoured Brigade—the teeth, the arms, the punching machine of the force—that was so carefully, expensively and contentiously trained in Saif Sareea will be used for desert warfare in Iraq?
Mr. Hoon: I am not going to give any indication of the nature of the force package that will be available. If the hon. Gentleman looks again at the words that I used in the statement, he will see that I said that a range of military options will be available to the commanders of UK forces. It would not be sensible for me to dwell on any particular aspect of those forces, as he knows full well.
Mike Gapes (Ilford, South): The Secretary of State will know that Saddam Hussein's regime used Scud missiles in 1991 and that previously it used chemical weapons against its neighbour and its own people. What assurance can he give that, if our forces have to be deployed, they will be adequately protected against such attacks? In that context, is there effective interoperability with our NATO allies and other partners in the coalition if there is a material breach and military action becomes necessary?
Mr. Hoon: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that. I said that British forces would be properly protected in the event of a chemical, biological or nuclear attack against them. On interoperability, one of the most recent decisions is to ensure effective communications between different forces. One of the clear lessons from the operation in Afghanistan, especially the deployment of the international security
assistance force, is that NATO standard forces can work together quickly given their common training and common approach to equipment. We need to build on that recent success.
Mr. Mark Prisk (Hertford and Stortford): Given recent tragic incidents of friendly fire in different theatres of war, can the Secretary of State assure the House, and indeed the country, that all our service personnel deployed in theatre will have the equipment they need to communicate speedily and effectively with friendly units?
Mr. Hoon: I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising a serious and important point. I assure him that efforts are being made to ensure that that is the case.
Mr. Peter Kilfoyle (Liverpool, Walton): Recalling A. J. P. Taylor's theory on mobilisation, is not there a certain inevitability about military action given the Americans' stated intention of regime change in Iraq? Will the charters be British ships manned by British crews?
Mr. Hoon: As far as inevitability is concerned, the final observation in my statement was that military action is not inevitable. Equally, however, if we did not make prudent preparations, it would be inevitable that we could not take military action should the circumstances warrant it. I simply invite my hon. Friend to consider that. If he believes, as I am sure he does, in the need to enforce UN resolutions, he must also believe that it is necessary to take military action in certain circumstances to uphold those decisions. As for chartering ships, it is important that the UK has available to it a secure and reliable system of being able to transport both its people and its equipment.
Richard Younger-Ross (Teignbridge): I want to press the Secretary of State on humanitarian aid. Considering the disaster that occurred in Kurdistan after the Gulf war, what contingency plans has he made for humanitarian aid, and what calculations has the Ministry of Defence made for best case and worst case collateral damage?
Mr. Hoon: I shall not go into a great deal of detail at this stage about the range of possible consequences of military action that has yet to be decided on. However, I can assure the hon. Gentleman, not least because of our experience in Afghanistan, where a huge amount of humanitarian aid was promptly made available after military operations, that the matter will be high on our list of priorities.
Glenda Jackson (Hampstead and Highgate): If war is inevitable only if Iraq fails to comply with Security Council resolution 1441, will all members of the Security Council be furnished with the American analysis of the Iraqi document? Given the somewhat intemperate statements of Secretary Powell, who rushed to judgment on the document's veracity, will such an analysis be verified by the UN inspectors before any decision is made by the Security Council, or is the will of the international community reduced to that of the United States?
Mr. Hoon: I do not accept that for a moment. If my hon. Friend looks carefully later at the question that she just asked me, she will realise that the answer is a matter for the United States. I emphasise to her and other hon. Members that the United States and, quite separately, the United Kingdom will be making their own assessment of the material, as, I anticipate, will other members of the Security Council. There have been certain adjustments in the material made available for perfectly understandable reasons, because it is necessary to ensure that nothing that is communicated to members of the UN should assist in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Other than that, it will be open to members of the Security Council to make their own assessment.
Mr. Gary Streeter (South-West Devon): In supporting the steps being taken by the Secretary of State, I ask him to give the House an assurance that, before he deploys Challenger 2 tanks to the Gulf, he will deal not only with their desertisation but with the technical deficiencies that came to light in recent exercises in Canada. Will he make sure that, in the coming combat, if that occurs, our troops have high-quality equipment that is not likely to break down as they are charging towards Baghdad?
Mr. Hoon: Of course, Challenger 2 tanks regularly exercise in Canada, so it is important to recognise that our information about the performance of the equipment is regularly updated. I assure the hon. Gentleman and the House that every effort will be made to incorporate all the lessons learned from previous exercises and deployments.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover): Are the Government aware that outside this place there is probably a majority of the British people who are against a war on Iraq? That was not true of the Falklands, Kosovo or Afghanistan, and it must worry Ministers as it worries those of us on the Back Benches. Is my right hon. Friend aware that many electors say that this is about a vain American President wanting to complete the job that his father did not do 12 years ago? They also think that it is about oil. I say to my right hon. Friend and the Government that vanity is not sufficient reason to spill the blood of innocent men, women and children, either here or in Iraq.
Mr. Hoon: My hon. Friend and I are parliamentary neighbours; we live in the same county and therefore come across the same sorts of people. I do not find that people are saying quite what he says. I recognise that there is concern and that there should be concern. There is concern in the House and on this Front Bench about any decision to deploy British forces in a war.
I simply do not accept, however, that the British people believe any of the criticisms that my hon. Friend makes of the United States or its President. They are looking for UN Security Council resolutions to be upheld, ensuring that Saddam Hussein and his regime cannot threaten the stability of the region or indeed the safety and security of British people, whether they are British troops deployed in Cyprus or people here in the United Kingdom.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |