Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140
- 151)
TUESDAY 30 MARCH 2004
RT HON
MR JACK
STRAW MP, MR
JOHN SAWERS
CMG AND MR
EDWARD OAKDEN
CMG
Q140 Andrew Mackinlay: Foreign Secretary,
when I was in Iraq with another colleague, we asked about the
Iraqi Survey Group and at the most senior level both in the United
States and the United Kingdom representation, nobody had any intercourse,
any relationship, any knowledge of the work of the Iraqi Survey
Group. It became quite clear that the Iraqi Survey Group was either
directly answerable to the Pentagon or the National Security Council
or somebody at that level in DC. I assume it was a joint collaborative
effort. To whom are they answerable here? Do you know what is
going on with regard to the Iraqi Survey Group?
Mr Straw: More or less, yes.
Q141 Andrew Mackinlay: In fact we
had a public session with Sir Jeremy Greenstock here the other
week and he had to say that even at his level he had nothing .
. .
Mr Straw: It is formally responsible
to the CIA in Washington DC. There are a number of British people
involved in it. It happens, Mr Mackinlay, that there is to be
an announcement from the Iraqi Survey Group later on today at
about 5.30 or 6.00 UK time because evidence will be given by the
current Head, Mr Duelfer, to a closed session of Congress and
a synopsis of the unclassified part of his evidence will be made
public later on today. When I said "more or less", I
am not involved day to day in the operations of it, nor their
administration, but as to whether I see classified reports of
what they have found, yes.
Q142 Andrew Mackinlay: And are these
United States' operations?
Mr Straw: Yes, it is a United
States' operation which we participate in, but we see those involved,
including Mr Duelfer, quite regularly.
Q143 Andrew Mackinlay: I want to
come back, as I have got a few minutes left, to Kosovo. It seems
to me that we would be failing in our duty to have the Foreign
Secretary here and not ask about something in our own back yard.
It seems that both Parliament and probably the Government have
taken their eye off the ball with regards to Kosovo. It certainly
has not been stable for months or years and, in fairness, we,
as parliamentarians, have not raised it. It is clearly a very
fragile situation. We have got the Serb Government, Prime Minister
Kostunica, talking about cantonisation again. Many of us were
hoping for the final settlement, the final decision as to the
future of Kosovo fairly soon. Where are we at with regards to
the British Government? It is something which clearly could flare
up with repercussions not just for the region, but again for terrorism.
Mr Straw: I do not think we have
had our eye off the ball at all. Internal stability has always
been more fragile in Kosovo than it has in the other parts of
the former Republic of Yugoslavia and it is less advanced in terms
of its development of its political institutions for all sorts
of reasons. As you will know, Mr Mackinlay, we have supplemented
a number of British troops there and for the moment it looks as
though the situation is going back to something like normality.
Meanwhile, we discussed this in the Council of European Foreign
Ministers this time last week and again at the European Council
at the end of the week. There is a real commitment to the two-stage
approach to Kosovo. The first stage is to establish institutions
which follow European standards. Only when we have done that should
we move down the road of discussions about Kosovo's final status
because its final status is where there are institutions which
operate to European standards and its future would be terrible
if all we had was a shell state without the institutional structure
to support it. It is really important that we get the institutions
established, make sure they operate to standard and the law is
prevalent and meanwhile frankly put on ice the issue of the final
status.
Q144 Andrew Mackinlay: As to the
Kurdish area of Iraq, how confident are you that that, as a part,
a constituent of the federal Republic of Iraq, is going to hold?
It seems to me to be two wholly legitimate ends of a tug of war,
as it were, between the people who want to see it as part of the
federal structure, and I know what has been agreed, but I am just
doubtful about this, and also the Kurds who have enjoyed such
autonomy, almost like statehood, with what they had and which
they want to hold. It does seem to me that we are going on a lot
of hope rather than substance and surety. Of course it is outside
our minds now because less journalists are going there, parliamentarians
have not been there, or at least Ann Clwyd has been but I do not
think other committees have, so I wonder if you could help us
on that.
Mr Straw: First of all, it is
imperative that the territorial integrity of Iraq is maintained.
It is not in the interests of any one of Iraq's neighbours to
see it broken up and I think most Kurds understand that, that
it would be very destabilising. It would not necessarily achieve
the objective they have for it and I think it is highly arguable
if the Kurdish area sought independence that the neighbours would
treat that with equanimity, and the reverse would be the case,
so in the pursuit of greater autonomy, they end up with much less.
I think they understand that. Secondly, squaring the circle between
a properly functioning government at a federal level or state
level and at the individual provincial level was one of the great
challenges in the drafting of the transitional administrative
law. It was one of the points where there was the argument over
the Friday and Saturday between some of the Shia representatives
and the Kurds and it was particularly on this issue of, as it
were, what lock could individual provinces have over the outcome
of the referendum to which Mr Sawers referred about half an hour
ago. Some quite, I think, skillful architecture has been behind
the current structure which seeks to balance things and it will
carry on being a balancing act, but let me say that a point I
have made to a number of Iraqi politicians is that it is hard-going
now, but there are actually plenty of states around the world
which managed to balance different ethnic, linguistic and religious
divisions and do it quite successfully.
Q145 Mr Illsley: On 22 March European
interior ministers made the European Declaration on Combating
Terrorism. Is there any likelihood that this is going to put across
other measures to combat terrorism? Is it likely to duplicate
any existing measures that we have in place?
Mr Straw: I do not think so.
Q146 Mr Illsley: Is there any danger
that moves towards European co-operation on terrorism are likely
to alienate the United States? I say that with one thing particularly
in mind because last week we were somewhat surprised, or I was
and some of my colleagues were, to be told by members of the US
Administration that they had a substantial amount of evidence
linking al-Qaeda to Saddam Hussein and a substantial amount of
evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction which
they chose not to publish or even share with this country, as
I understand it.
Mr Straw: I would be interested
to hear from them because, I have to say, I certainly said on
many occasions before the Iraq conflict I saw no evidence which
linked Iraq operationally to al-Qaeda, particularly in respect
of the period before September 11. That is the first I have heard
of that claim that the United States has evidence in respect of
the possession of WMD by Iraq which they have not shared with
us. Have you heard of that? It may be a wind-up, Mr Illsley! Where
did this meeting take place?
Q147 Mr Illsley: In the British deputy
Ambassador's residence in Washington. Quickly moving on, the Prime
Minister last week made probably the most celebrated visit to
Libya since the visit of my former colleague of the NUM[7]
20 years ago. I hope the Prime Minister got more than we did!
Mr Straw: Your former colleague
did all right.
Q148 Mr Illsley: Does the Libya case
offer us any hope in dealing with other rogue states? Are there
lessons we can learn there, other measures we can take, to bring
other rogue states back into the loop?
Mr Straw: I think the Libya example
is of huge importance. It does show that leaders of state, as
Libya has been, can be in breach of their international obligations,
can be developing very serious WMD capabilities in the nuclear,
chemical and biological field and the international community,
if they are willing to dispose of them and take steps to come
fully into compliance with those international obligations, will
reciprocate. That seems to me to be a much better approach to
dealing with these threats than having to go to the
Security Council and/or taking military action. However, it can
only take place where there is a willing collaborator, as there
was, it turned out, in Libya.
Q149 Mr Illsley: Is there any move
to pursue those negotiations any further, perhaps along the lines
of political reform?
Mr Straw: This is the start of
a deepening relationship with Libya, and it would be quite inappropriate
for us to say, "That's fine, our engagement will now cease".
That is neither desired by the United Kingdom, the United States,
nor is it desired by the government of Libya. Who knows exactly
what the motivations were that led President Gadaffi last March
to seek to actively co-operate with us, but there is no doubt
that the desire to see the economy modernised and greater access
to education and science and technology by his people was one
of the motivations.
Q150 Ms Stuart: Just reading today's
newspaper reports, is the United Kingdom Government worried about
reports that serving British soldiers serving in Iraq are also
working for private security firms?
Mr Straw: I am worried about it.
I have to say that the report in the newspaper was the first I
knew about it, but we are certainly investigating.
Q151 Chairman: Thank you, Foreign
Secretary. We did agree that we would finish at 2.15; we know
you have to prepare for the debate in the Chamber to follow. I
anticipate we will want to send you some written questions[8]
and I am also confident we will want to have more time in respect
of Afghanistan, which we have hardly touched on now. So we have
carried out our part of the deal.
Mr Straw: As you know, there is
no greater pleasure in my life than giving evidence to the Foreign
Affairs Select Committee!
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed.
7 National Union of Miners Back
8
Please see letter from the Chairman to the Secretary of State,
Ev 66. Back
| 
