HL Deb 22 February 1993 vol 543 cc6-8

2.51 p.m.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, in asking my Question I wish to apologise to the House for not having been in my place when it was called three weeks ago. I beg leave to ask Her Majesty's Government:

What words in what UN Security Council resolution in their opinion authorised the United States to attack an industrial plant in Baghdad with cruise missiles, an attack which the Prime Minister immediately endorsed.

Lord Henley

My Lords, action on 17th January by United States cruise missiles against a site which the Iraqis themselves admitted was associated with the Iraqi programme to develop weapons of mass destruction was taken to ensure that Iraq complies with its obligations under United Nations Security Resolution 687; a mandatory resolution under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter which set out the terms of the formal cease-fire and related resolutions.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, many in the House mould be much obliged if the noble Lord could go further and state under which section of Resolution 687 the bombing was carried out. I have not myself been able to find words in that resolution which justify armed attack on the territory of another state.

Lord Henley

My Lords, under Resolution 687 and under authority from the United Nations Security Council the Iraqis were warned of the serious consequences of non-compliance with Resolution 687. Further, on 14th January the Western allies and Russia gave the Iraqis a final warning. On 15th January they set a deadline later that day for unconditional agreement to the United Nations Special Commission flights. On 16th January the United Nations Special Commission submitted revised flight applications. Iraq wilfully ignored all those warnings and imposed unacceptable conditions on the United Nations Special Commission flights. Iraq also continued to deploy missiles threatening coalition aircraft in the southern "no fly" zone. There was therefore no alternative but for the coalition to remove the threat to aircraft and to use force, as it did, to bring home to the Iraqis the need to comply with the United Nations resolutions. The operation was limited to achieving those aims.

Lord Judd

My Lords, does the noble Lord accept that we on this side of the House are fully with the Government in their firm resolve in dealing with the Baghdad regime and that we therefore totally supported the air strikes? Does the noble Lord further agree that it is essential for the credibility of the UN that whenever serious military action is being taken in the name of the UN it must always be demonstrably with the full, specific, explicit and prior authority of the Security Council and never on the assumption that the Security Council will find a way of giving subsequent endorsement?

Lord Henley

My Lords, I think it is quite clear from what I have said that we did have the full and explicit authority of the United Nations Security Council. Perhaps I may further say that I am very grateful to the noble Lord and to the noble Lord's Front Bench for their support for Her Majesty's Government on this issue.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that if this action had not been taken there would have been a failure to implement Security Council resolutions?

Lord Henley

My Lords, my noble friend is absolutely correct.

Lord Ashley of Stoke

My Lords, I too support the Government in the thrust of their policy in the action taken. Although the lawyers can argue about the actual wording of the resolution I support the Minister's interpretation. Will he take the thrust of the comment made by the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, that it is of paramount importance that we ensure that all action is through the Security Council?

Lord Henley

My Lords, I thought that I had made that perfectly clear in my responses both to the noble Lord, Lord Judd, and to the noble Lord, Lord Kennet. But again I am grateful for the noble Lord's support.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, does the noble Lord accept that there are still one or two United Nations and Security Council resolutions referring to the appalling suffering of many people in Iraq which have not yet been implemented? Ought not the Government to be prepared to ask when something will be done effectively—not merely through the passing of resolutions —by the United Nations?

Lord Henley

My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord, as he has made clear on many occasions, that Iraq has a long record of denying basic human rights to its own people. The Iraqi regime's appalling brutality and disregard for the welfare of its people led the United Nations Security Council to adopt Resolution 688 in 1991. That demanded an immediate end to repression in Iraq.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, the Government have not been able, either today or in answer to an earlier question about the bombardment of missile sites in the "no-fly" zones, to quote the particular words in the numbered resolutions which they maintain legitimated the use of armed force. Will they bear in mind that every time a member of the Security Council interprets a Security Council resolution to suit its own interests, whether passing or permanent, that member licenses others to do the same?

Lord Henley

My Lords, the plant referred to in the noble Lord's original Question was capable of producing nuclear weapons or material for nuclear weapons. The Iraqis themselves specifically admitted to some of the United Nations Special Commission teams when carrying out inspections that the plant was producing equipment for the nuclear programme. Some of that plant had then been sealed by the United Nations inspectors, but the International Atomic Energy Agency was considering whether it should be destroyed. Most people in this country and in the countries around Iraq will, I think, be profoundly relieved that it now has been so destroyed. The noble Lord asks for a reference in Resolution 687. If he cares to look at paragraphs 12 and 13 of Resolution 687, he will find that they specifically refer to nuclear weapons and the ability to manufacture nuclear weapons.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, that is not an answer to my question.