Iraq (Hansard, 25 July 2002)

§ Baroness Crawley
My Lords, the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission has been denied access to Iraq since its establishment in December 1999. We consistently urge Iraq to allow the return of weapons inspectors. Since March this year, the UN Secretary-General has held three rounds of talks with the Iraqi Foreign Minister in an attempt to break this impasse. Regrettably, Iraq continues to defy the UN by refusing to allow the inspectors in.

§ Lord Judd
My Lords, there is no argument about the fact that we are dealing with a cruel and sinister regime. The question is how we do so while protecting the people of Iraq who have suffered under it. Does my noble friend agree that in the absence of any progress on inspectors, before any momentum towards military action becomes irreversible there must be convincing evidence of its necessity and a clear statement of war aims, specific and explicit UN authorisation, an analysis of the regional and global implications, clarity about how the future stability of Iraq would be secured, realism about the cost of reconstruction and rehabilitation and how that would be met, and above all a determination at all costs to distinguish between the Saddam regime and the people of Iraq?

§ Baroness Crawley
My Lords, as we have repeatedly made clear, most recently on 18th June, no decision has been taken to launch military action. We are 535 proceeding prudently and patiently in consultation with our allies. Her Majesty's Government are committed to ensuring that they always act in accordance with international law. Given that no decision has been taken to launch military action, many of my noble friend's questions are entirely hypothetical. I understand that it is not wise to give hypothetical answers from the Dispatch Box.
My noble friend asked for convincing evidence. Her Majesty's Government have carried out detailed studies of quantities of material unaccounted for by UNSCOM inspectors that have potential applications in Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programme. They are as follows: up to 3,000 tonnes of precursor chemicals, approximately 300 tonnes of which in the Iraqi chemical weapons programmes were unique to the production of VX nerve agent; up to 360 tonnes of bulk chemical weapon agent, including 1.5 tonnes of VX nerve agent; and over 3,000 special munitions for the delivery of chemical and biological agents. I hope that your Lordships agree that that gives us great evidence of the threat that we face. We shall release further material about this threat in due course.

§ Baroness Williams of Crosby
My Lords, does the Minister accept that one of the great problems that the House confronts is that it is either too early to discuss the issue of a possible invasion of Iraq because we do not yet have a decision, or too late because the decision has been taken, as indicated by the Prime Minister's answer to a question in another place when he referred to "when" that decision is taken, although he said later that that was a slip of the tongue? Does the Minister accept that one of the great problems that we confront is discussing on what basis we would be morally justified in a campaign that would almost certainly mean the death of many thousands of civilians and very probably the destruction of one of the oldest civilisations on earth? When will the Prime Minister feel able to publish evidence not of the possession of weapons of mass destruction—which are also possessed by Israel, Britain, France, Russia and many other countries—but of the intent to use them and the ability to deliver them? That is central to whether Britain would be morally justified in taking part in a military attack against Iraq.

§ Baroness Crawley
My Lords, the noble Baroness has great international experience. She will know that it is not possible for me to say today when that information can be published. Much of the information is highly sensitive. We will publish what we can when we can. That is what the Prime Minister has said. I am pleased that the noble Baroness has also taken the opportunity to repeat what the Prime Minister said yesterday and again this morning—that no decision has been taken to launch military action. The noble Baroness will also know that Her Majesty's Government would regard the use of force against any state as lawful if it had been authorised by the United Nations Security Council, if it were in the exercise of 536 the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence, or, exceptionally, if it were carried out to avert an overwhelming humanitarian catastrophe.

§ Lord Howell of Guildford
My Lords, both previous questions rightly raised the issue of a dossier to give us more information on Saddam Hussein's involvement both in weapons of mass destruction and in Al'Qaeda terrorism. I fully understand the noble Baroness's position about no decision being taken. However, can she assure us that the dossier, which has now been promised by the Prime Minister, is forthcoming and that if it is available in the next few weeks it will be properly circulated to noble Lords and to the other place although Parliament will be in recess? Can she confirm reports that, even before the final decision, the British military authorities are having talks in London now with their Australian counterparts—the Australian SAS—about the various positions they would take up in the proposed blockade which will be operated from Turkey, Kuwait, Qatar and other areas around Iraq?

§ Baroness Crawley
My Lords, I can tell the noble Lord, Lord Howell, that the Prime Minister will ensure that the information dossier will be in the public domain as soon as the time is right. However, I cannot confirm the discussions that the noble Lord asks about.