|
Disarmament DocumentationBack to Disarmament Documentation 'I have to accept that we have not found them', UK Prime Minister Tony Blair on Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction, June 18 & 19, 2004
Tony Blair, Prime Minister's Questions, House of Commons, Official Report, 7 Jul 2004, Column 835Mr. Robert N. Wareing (Liverpool, West Derby) (Lab): Does my right hon. Friend still believe that there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? The Prime Minister: I told the Liaison Committee yesterday that, although I was confident that those weapons existed last year, I have to accept that they have not been found. However, let me tell my hon. Friend that there is clearly no doubt at all that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and I suppose that he would accept that. It is the case that he used them against his own people, but it is also true that we have not found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, although we have found plenty of evidence of intention, capability and intent. I simply say to my hon. Friend that it is sensible to wait for the outcome of the work of the Iraq survey group, but I certainly do not accept in any shape or form that Iraq was not a threat to the region and the wider world. I repeat again what I have said on many occasions-I believe that the world and this country are safer without Saddam Hussein in power. Source: UK Parliament website, http://www.parliament.uk. Tony Blair, Oral Evidence to the House of Commons Liaison Committee, July 6, 2004UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE, To be published as HC 310 ii House of COMMONS, MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE LIAISON COMMITTEE, THE PRIME MINISTER, Tuesday 6 July 2004, RT HON TONY BLAIR MP. Q236 Sir George Young: Prime Minister, can we try to round off a discussion that we had a year ago when you appeared before the Liaison Committee? You were pressed quite hard by a number of us on weapons of mass destruction. On several occasions you referred to the Iraq Survey Group, and you invited us to wait and see. We have waited but we have not seen. Do you now accept that the evidence may not be there? Mr Blair: The Iraq Survey Group will do a final report, but, as I think I have said elsewhere, the two things we do know are these: we know that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction but we know we have not found them. Q237 Sir George Young: We knew that a year ago, and you invited us to wait and see the evidence. You went on to say: "I am very confident they will find the evidence." Sir Jeremy Greenstock, on Sunday, said the evidence is just not there. Do you agree with him? Mr Blair: As I say, what I have to accept is that I was very, very confident we would find them; I was very confident, even when I spoke to you this time last year, that the Iraq Survey Group would find them because all the intelligence and evidence we had was that these weapons of mass destruction existed. I have to accept that we have not found them and that we may not find them. What I would say very strongly, however, is that to go to the opposite extreme and say, therefore, no threat existed from Saddam Hussein would be a mistake. We do not know what has happened to them; they could have been removed, they could have been hidden, they could have been destroyed. At some point, I hope that we will find, when the Iraq Survey Group make their final report, exactly what it is they say. As you know, the Iraq Survey Group, and what they have said already, indicates quite clearly that there have been breaches of the United Nations' resolutions. They do not, in any shape or form, say he was not a threat but, it is absolutely true, they have said that in their view the stockpiles of WMD have not been found. Q238 Sir George Young: If we may never find them, in retrospect, perhaps, was it a mistake to put so much emphasis on weapons of mass destruction and less emphasis on regime change? Mr Blair: I think the important thing is to go back to what the purpose of this action was. The purpose of the action was in order to enforce the United Nations resolutions. That is why I say it is very important not to go to the other extreme and say, "Because we have not found actual stockpiles of WMD, therefore he was not a threat." It is absolutely clear from the evidence that has already been found by the Iraq Survey Group that he had the strategic capability, the intent and that he was in multiple breaches of the United Nations' resolutions. There is no point in me sitting here and saying "I am saying the same to you now as I said a year ago" because the year has passed and we have not found the actual stockpiles of weapons. I genuinely believe that those stockpiles of weapons were there; I think that most people did, and that is why the whole of the international community came together and passed the United Nations resolution it did, but that is a very different thing from saying Saddam was not a threat; the truth is he was a threat to his region and to the wider world, and the world is a safer place without him. Q239 Sir George Young: I think we fought the right war but it sounds as if we fought it for the wrong reasons. Mr Blair: No, I do not think that is right either, because I think that that would be to suggest there was no issue in relation to Saddam and WMD. What Jeremy Greenstock said on Sunday is probably what most people speculate about, because, as I say, we know he had the weapons - he used them against his own people - but we have not found them. So you have to accept that. The question is what was the nature of this threat from Saddam? Maybe it is different in the sense that he retained strategic capability and intent; he may have removed, hidden or even destroyed those weapons - we do not know and we have to wait for the Iraq Survey Group to complete its findings - but what I would not accept is that he was not a threat and a threat in WMD terms. Q240 Mr Leigh: If I could just follow on from what Sir George was putting to you (I think we would all like to help you out on this), your place in history is secure, you have freed this nation from a gangster regime, and I think you have moved on quite considerably this morning, and I think you have been very reasonable. You said last year - it is in Hansard and George has mentioned it - "My view is that I am very confident they will find the evidence that such programmes existed." What you have now said today, a year later, is, "We may not find them." I think what people are trying to say to you and what people want from you is some acknowledgement that all that was said to them, and what you said to them, about the reasons for going to war a year ago, which was basically that this chap had weapons of mass destruction and posed a threat to the region and to us, was wrong. At some stage can you not just find it in yourself to accept that we went to war for the wrong reasons, and say "I'm sorry about this but I still defend the war, I can defend the war, because we got rid of this gangster regime"? Mr Blair: I think that is a very reasonable way of putting the point to me, if I can say it, but let me just say this to you: obviously, I do believe it is good that we have got rid of Saddam Hussein and he was a tyrant and we can agree on that. However, I do not actually believe that he was not a threat in respect of weapons of mass destruction. All I am saying is there is no point in me sitting here and saying, a year on and we have not found these weapons, that I am going to say to you exactly the same as I said a year ago. As I said recently, I have to accept the fact that we have not found them. On the other hand, what we have found is very clear evidence of strategic intent and capability and a desire to carry on developing these weapons. Whether they were hidden, or removed, or destroyed even, the plain fact is he was undoubtedly in breach of United Nations resolutions. So even if it is a threat that is different in the sense that the breaches of United Nations resolutions in respect of WMD are the breaches that the Iraq Survey Group has outlined, or David Kaye outlined, a short time ago, I still believe it was justified in those terms as well, although I agree, obviously, for a lot of people they will say "Saddam Hussein is an evil person. You got rid of an evil person, that is fine". The basis upon which we went to war was the basis of enforcing United Nations resolutions in respect of WMD. Source: UK Parliament website, http://www.parliament.uk. © 2003 The Acronym Institute. |