Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Interview With British Foreign Secretary

Aired September 24, 2002 - 13:12   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Joining us now from London to talk more about the case against Iraq, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.
Mr. Secretary, thanks for being with us.

JACK STRAW, BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY: Thank you.

PHILLIPS: Well, let's talk about this dossier. Of course, we have been talking about it all morning.

Do you feel that there is anything that British intelligence knows about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction that the U.S. does not know? Are both countries on the same page?

STRAW: Oh, we're exactly on the same page. And as you know, there has been a longstanding arrangement for the sharing of intelligence between the United States and the United Kingdom. And of course, we consulted the United States about what information that was contained in the dossier that was safe to give to a wider public audience.

I think the dossier really does add up to a very comprehensive condemnation of the nature of the Saddam Hussein regime, both the nature of the capability it has of weapons of mass destruction -- chemical, biological weapons -- the missile systems it has to launch them, and its gradual, but a very important development, of a nuclear capability, alongside the very clear intent that places Saddam in a uniquely evil and uniquely dangerous category to use the weapons which he has.

And overall, as I think the prime minister spelled out so eloquently in the House of Commons today, that adds up to a case, just as President Bush made the same case in his very powerful speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September the 12th, for action to be taken by the United Nations Security Council.

PHILLIPS: And you mention this dossier is very comprehensive. I think many of us were extremely surprised at the details that we were able to read throughout this dossier.

As you know, the president and the Bush administration, has been very vague when talking about the details of why Saddam Hussein is a threat. Many politicians are asking for the smoking gun -- for details.

Does the information, provided in this intelligences dossier, make the case, confirm the fact that Saddam Hussein is a horrendous threat and must go?

STRAW: Yes, it does. Part of the dossier builds on already published information. One of my frustrations, as someone who is making the case for the international community to take the threat posed by Saddam seriously, is that so many people have not bothered to read or to access on the Internet the thousands of pages, for example, of the weapons inspectors reports, which explain why there is still a present and mounting threat from Saddam Hussein.

But part of the document is a synopsis of the intelligence that has been available to us, and I'm very glad that you have, if I may so, have been impressed by the detail. Because it's the kind of detail that we felt the public was seeking on both sides of the Atlantic to convince them that the threat was not a piece of history, which was really resolved with the Gulf War or Operation Desert Fox, but is a mounting threat, not least because of Saddam's throwing out of the weapons inspectors four years ago, and his continuing evil intention and actions in respect to his own people, as well as those outside and the rest of the region.

PHILLIPS: And, sir, you have talked about -- and so has Prime Minister Tony Blair -- about disarmament. The U.S. is talking about a regime change. Does Britain support a regime change?

STRAW: Well, I believe the United States and the United Kingdom really are in the same place here. When President Bush made his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on the 12th of September, he spoke almost exclusively in terms of the objectives of actions to be endorsed, authorized in international law by the United Nations Security Council, of dealing with the weapons of mass destruction, of disarming Saddam.

Now, on the issue of regime change, I don't think there is anybody in the civilized world, still less anybody who is not part of the regime actually in Iraq, who doesn't wish to see the back of Saddam Hussein very quickly. And that may indeed be a consequence of military action, which we are forced to take if Saddam does not comply with the clear obligations upon him.

But in terms of the focus of those obligations, those are for there to be a complete disarmament of the weapons of mass destruction, which Saddam currently holds. And the consequence of that is if Saddam complies peacefully -- and I emphasized in my speech today that both the British government and, I believe, the United States government, wish to see this resolved peacefully.

If Saddam does comply peacefully, but the result of his complying is his disarmament, then of course the nature of the regime has changed rather fundamentally. On the other hand, if he refuses to comply in that way and force has to be used, as I say, a consequence of the action but not its principal purpose, the regime as a whole will have changed.

PHILLIPS: Is your military ready to support a U.S. war against Iraq? STRAW: Well, we have made clear that we are, indeed, ready to contribute the use of force provided that is taken within the ambit of international law. Again, I believe the position which is identical to that by United States. But we've also made clear that we don't wish to go down that path.

However, it's just a reality, if you are dealing with regimes like the Saddam Hussein regime, you will only get a peaceful resolution of such potential threat by, in turn, making it clear that if it is not resolved peacefully, you will use force. And that is authorized, as I think people know, by Chapter 7 of the United Nations charter.

PHILLIPS: Mr. Secretary, my final question: Do you believe that Saddam Hussein will and could use weapons of mass destruction against the United States, against Britain, against his own people?

STRAW: I believe he's got the capacity, first of all, the plain capacity to use them against his own people. He has used them in the past. He is the only leader of a regime who is being condemned by the United Nations for breaching the Chemical Weapons Convention, gassed 5,000 of his own people not so long ago.

He has used such weapons against the Iranians during the Iran- Iraq War. He is the only regime which has invaded two other sovereign territories in the last 20 years and missile launched -- launched missiles against three other sovereign countries.

So, the danger is there. For the present time, he has the capacity to threaten American and British interests, and therefore, the security of the whole region.

Over time, if we were to leave him, do nothing about the threat that he poses, then, for sure, he would without doubt develop and then have the potential to use weapons of mass destruction directly against the United Kingdom and the United States. And we've got to stop that happening, and meanwhile, stop the threat that he poses to the region.

PHILLIPS: British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, sir, we do appreciate your time very much.

STRAW: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.







Aired September 24, 2002 - 13:12   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Joining us now from London to talk more about the case against Iraq, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.
Mr. Secretary, thanks for being with us.

JACK STRAW, BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY: Thank you.

PHILLIPS: Well, let's talk about this dossier. Of course, we have been talking about it all morning.

Do you feel that there is anything that British intelligence knows about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction that the U.S. does not know? Are both countries on the same page?

STRAW: Oh, we're exactly on the same page. And as you know, there has been a longstanding arrangement for the sharing of intelligence between the United States and the United Kingdom. And of course, we consulted the United States about what information that was contained in the dossier that was safe to give to a wider public audience.

I think the dossier really does add up to a very comprehensive condemnation of the nature of the Saddam Hussein regime, both the nature of the capability it has of weapons of mass destruction -- chemical, biological weapons -- the missile systems it has to launch them, and its gradual, but a very important development, of a nuclear capability, alongside the very clear intent that places Saddam in a uniquely evil and uniquely dangerous category to use the weapons which he has.

And overall, as I think the prime minister spelled out so eloquently in the House of Commons today, that adds up to a case, just as President Bush made the same case in his very powerful speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September the 12th, for action to be taken by the United Nations Security Council.

PHILLIPS: And you mention this dossier is very comprehensive. I think many of us were extremely surprised at the details that we were able to read throughout this dossier.

As you know, the president and the Bush administration, has been very vague when talking about the details of why Saddam Hussein is a threat. Many politicians are asking for the smoking gun -- for details.

Does the information, provided in this intelligences dossier, make the case, confirm the fact that Saddam Hussein is a horrendous threat and must go?

STRAW: Yes, it does. Part of the dossier builds on already published information. One of my frustrations, as someone who is making the case for the international community to take the threat posed by Saddam seriously, is that so many people have not bothered to read or to access on the Internet the thousands of pages, for example, of the weapons inspectors reports, which explain why there is still a present and mounting threat from Saddam Hussein.

But part of the document is a synopsis of the intelligence that has been available to us, and I'm very glad that you have, if I may so, have been impressed by the detail. Because it's the kind of detail that we felt the public was seeking on both sides of the Atlantic to convince them that the threat was not a piece of history, which was really resolved with the Gulf War or Operation Desert Fox, but is a mounting threat, not least because of Saddam's throwing out of the weapons inspectors four years ago, and his continuing evil intention and actions in respect to his own people, as well as those outside and the rest of the region.

PHILLIPS: And, sir, you have talked about -- and so has Prime Minister Tony Blair -- about disarmament. The U.S. is talking about a regime change. Does Britain support a regime change?

STRAW: Well, I believe the United States and the United Kingdom really are in the same place here. When President Bush made his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on the 12th of September, he spoke almost exclusively in terms of the objectives of actions to be endorsed, authorized in international law by the United Nations Security Council, of dealing with the weapons of mass destruction, of disarming Saddam.

Now, on the issue of regime change, I don't think there is anybody in the civilized world, still less anybody who is not part of the regime actually in Iraq, who doesn't wish to see the back of Saddam Hussein very quickly. And that may indeed be a consequence of military action, which we are forced to take if Saddam does not comply with the clear obligations upon him.

But in terms of the focus of those obligations, those are for there to be a complete disarmament of the weapons of mass destruction, which Saddam currently holds. And the consequence of that is if Saddam complies peacefully -- and I emphasized in my speech today that both the British government and, I believe, the United States government, wish to see this resolved peacefully.

If Saddam does comply peacefully, but the result of his complying is his disarmament, then of course the nature of the regime has changed rather fundamentally. On the other hand, if he refuses to comply in that way and force has to be used, as I say, a consequence of the action but not its principal purpose, the regime as a whole will have changed.

PHILLIPS: Is your military ready to support a U.S. war against Iraq? STRAW: Well, we have made clear that we are, indeed, ready to contribute the use of force provided that is taken within the ambit of international law. Again, I believe the position which is identical to that by United States. But we've also made clear that we don't wish to go down that path.

However, it's just a reality, if you are dealing with regimes like the Saddam Hussein regime, you will only get a peaceful resolution of such potential threat by, in turn, making it clear that if it is not resolved peacefully, you will use force. And that is authorized, as I think people know, by Chapter 7 of the United Nations charter.

PHILLIPS: Mr. Secretary, my final question: Do you believe that Saddam Hussein will and could use weapons of mass destruction against the United States, against Britain, against his own people?

STRAW: I believe he's got the capacity, first of all, the plain capacity to use them against his own people. He has used them in the past. He is the only leader of a regime who is being condemned by the United Nations for breaching the Chemical Weapons Convention, gassed 5,000 of his own people not so long ago.

He has used such weapons against the Iranians during the Iran- Iraq War. He is the only regime which has invaded two other sovereign territories in the last 20 years and missile launched -- launched missiles against three other sovereign countries.

So, the danger is there. For the present time, he has the capacity to threaten American and British interests, and therefore, the security of the whole region.

Over time, if we were to leave him, do nothing about the threat that he poses, then, for sure, he would without doubt develop and then have the potential to use weapons of mass destruction directly against the United Kingdom and the United States. And we've got to stop that happening, and meanwhile, stop the threat that he poses to the region.

PHILLIPS: British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, sir, we do appreciate your time very much.

STRAW: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.