This was an official letter I got from the British after I sent them a letter of protest just before the Iraq war. Shared with you to remember the propaganda then:
Dear Mr. XXXXX,
Thank you for your email of 13th March about Iraq.
The British Government understands that there is concern about military action. The decision to join a coalition of governments in military
action against Iraq, supported by a majority in the House of Commons on 18 March, was undertaken as a last resort. The Iraqi regime's refusal
to co-operate left us with no option. The purpose of our military action is to ensure once and for all the disarmament of Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) and their means of delivery as required by United Nations Security Council resolution (UNSCR) 1441 and previous
resolutions. The coalition's intention is to do this as quickly as possible and to keep Iraqi civilian casualties to a minimum. In the longer term
we want to ensure a better future for the Iraqi people and to achieve greater stability internationally.
Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have been central to Saddam Hussein's dictatorship since the 1980s. He has amassed poisons,
viruses and bacteria and pursued a nuclear weapons capability, in flagrant disregard of UNSCRs and Iraq's obligations as a non-nuclear
weapon state under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. In contravention of UNSCRs, Iraq has been developing ballistic missiles capable of
delivering these weapons to targets throughout the Middle East and even in south-east Europe.
Of course, other countries do have similar capabilities. But two things single out Iraq: the unambiguous obligations imposed by the Security
Council to disarm and Saddam Hussein's willingness to use WMD. No other country in modern times has used chemical weapons against its
neighbours or killed 5,000 of its own civilians and injured 10,000 more, as the Iraqi regime did in Halabja in 1988.
In November, the UN Security Council unanimously sent the Iraqi regime an uncompromising message: co-operate fully with weapons
inspectors or face disarmament by force. UNSCR 1441 gave Iraq one final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations, by giving
up once and for all its WMD and the means to deliver them. The burden was placed squarely on Iraq to make an immediate, full and honest
declaration of its WMD holdings.
It was clear from briefings by the weapons inspectors that Iraq's co-operation had been neither full nor immediate. The Iraqi declaration of 7
December was false, just as all its previous "full and final" declarations had been. The document released by the inspectors on 7 March, the
so-called clusters of outstanding issues, catalogued Iraqi evasion and deceit, of feigning co-operation while in reality pursuing a cynical policy
of concealment (www.unmovic.com). The document detailed at least 29 instances of Iraqi failure to provide credible evidence, and at least 17
occasions when inspectors uncovered evidence that contradicted the official Iraqi account. In all the discussions in the Security Council and
outside, no-one claimed that Iraq was in compliance with the obligations placed upon it. And with good reason. Iraq had simply not accounted
for the thousands of tonnes of chemical and biological weapons materials left unaccounted for when the regime forced the weapons
inspectors to leave in 1998. The regime's tactics were to deny the existence of WMD and, if caught out, to offer the smallest concession
possible in order to work for delay.
In the weeks before military action we worked very hard in a final effort to achieve a Security Council consensus on Iraq. We pointed out that it
was not a question of increasing the numbers of weapons inspectors, or of allowing more time for Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime to
bring themselves into compliance. We said that what was needed was an irreversible and strategic decision by Iraq to disarm, and to
disclose all the relevant information which it could and should have given in the last 12 years - a strategic decision like that taken by South
Africa when it decided freely to abandon its secret nuclear weapons programme. We acknowledged that, were the regime to co-operate in
this way, the weapons inspectors would of course need more time to complete their work, to verify the disarmament. We proposed tough but
realisable tests and a timetable for completion of those tests. In line with resolution 1441, we also sought an understanding that, if Iraq failed
those tests, it would not have taken the final opportunity which had been afforded to it.
The British Government deeply regrets that, despite all the United Kingdom's efforts, the Security Council could not agree a way forward to put
pressure on Iraq to take the strategic decision to disarm. Given this situation, we did not pursue a vote on the draft UK/US/Spanish resolution
tabled on 24 February and the co-sponsors reserved the right to take their own steps to secure the disarmament of Iraq.
Throughout this crisis we have considered the options carefully with our allies, taking account of the circumstances, such as the potential wider
impact on the region, and the need to act in accordance with international law. Military action to enforce Iraqi compliance is fully in accordance
with international law: authority to use force against Iraq exists from the combined effect of UNSCRs 678, 687 and 1441; and all of these
resolutions were adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which allows the use of force for the express purpose of restoring international
peace and security. Every possible care is being taken to minimise civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure.
We will work to ensure that the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people are met. The Department for International Development have already
committed £20 million to UN Agencies and non-governmental organisations for their preparations; set aside an initial £60 million for the
immediate humanitarian response; and seconded staff and others to the region. Our forces also have up to £30 million to enable them to meet
their humanitarian obligations under the laws of armed conflict.
We envisage a leading role for the UN in the reconstruction of Iraq. We want to see the earliest possible lifting of UN sanctions, when a new
government is in place willing to disarm Iraq of WMD, and to ensure that oil revenues are used for the benefit of the Iraqi people. We look
forward to an Iraq where there is respect for human rights and the rule of law, where all Iraqis have the opportunity to share in the country's
wealth, an Iraq at peace with its neighbours and which can play a full role in the international community.
Roger Seal
Press and Public Affairs
********************
For more information on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office visit
http://www.fco.gov.uk For information about the UK visit http:/ /www.i-
uk.com
Please note that all messages sent and received by members of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and its missions overseas may be
monitored centrally.
This is done to ensure the integrity of the system.
********************
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
