HL Deb 16 March 1998 vol 587 cc93-5WA
Lord Kennet

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will elucidate their interpretation of United Nations Security Council resolutions which might authorise further military attacks on Iraq without further recourse to the Security Council: whether this interpretation is agreed by other members of the United Nations Security Council, and if so which. [HL935]

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

The views of Her Majesty's Government on the interpretation of Security Council Resolution 1154 were set out in the statement made by Sir John Weston, the United Kingdom Permanent Representative to the United Nations, on adoption of the resolution; a copy of the statement has been placed in the Library of the House.

The legal justification for any military action in the future would depend upon all the circumstances at the time.

Lord Kennet

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they agree with the statement made by the United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Bill Richardson, that Resolution No. 1154 (1998) "is drafted so it is perfectly clear that any member can take unilateral action if it feels there is a grievous violation" of the United Nations-Iraq Aide Memoire (International Herald Tribune, 4 March). [HL936]

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

The views of Her Majesty's Government on the interpretation of Resolution 1154 were set out in the statement made by Sir John Weston, the United Kingdom Permanent Representative to the United Nations, on adoption of the resolution; a copy of the statement has been placed in the Library of the House.

Lord Kennet

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they have agreed to take part in any unilateral military action which the United States might take in pursuit of its interpretation of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1154 (1998), or to support such action. [HL937]

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

Her Majesty's Government would prefer to ensure compliance by Iraq with its obligations to the United Nations without the resort to force. But, as Security Council Resolution 1154 makes clear, if Iraq violates the agreement signed in Baghdad with the UN Secretary-General the severest consequences will follow. It is not sensible to speculate at this stage on what those consequences might be.

Lord Kennet

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What are the implications for international law if Resolution 1154 (1998) (or any other United Nations Security Council Resolution) is interpreted by one or more, but not by all, permanent members of the United Nations Security Council as authorising them to take "unilateral (military) action", and if they will urgently refer the matter to the World Court for an opinion on the lawfulness of any such unilateral military action. [HL938]

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

All members of the United Nations are required to comply with mandatory resolutions of the Security Council. Security Council Resolution 1154 was adopted unanimously by the Security Council. All members agreed that further violations of Iraq's obligations under relevant Security Council Resolutions and the Memorandum of Understanding signed in Baghdad would be followed by the severest consequences. It is not sensible at this stage to speculate on what those might be, nor to seek to involve the World Court in this matter.

Lord Kennet

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What they consider are the implications for other United Nations Resolutions, which establish various prohibitions relating to Iraq, of a decision by the United States to interpret Resolution 1154 (1998) unilaterally, and whether embargoes, sanctions etc., may in future be unilaterally interpreted and acted upon by all members of the Security Council in accordance with their feelings. [HL939]

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean

All members of the United Nations are required to comply with mandatory resolutions of the Security Council. It is not sensible to speculate on the consequences of hypothetical decisions by other members of the Council.