---

Britain was a U.S. ally against Iraq during the Gulf War. Now the House of Commons debated the country's potential involvement in the current conflict in the Middle East, the role of the United Nations and under what circumstances military intervention might be necessary. Kwame Holman reports.

---

KWAME HOLMAN: Eight years ago Britain was the first to join the coalition against Iraq and was secondly only to the United States in its commitment of personnel and material to defeat Saddam Hussein. Fifty thousand British servicemen and women went to the Persian Gulf to help reverse Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Today, British troops, ships, and planes again prepare to wage war, if called upon in the Gulf.

SPOKESPERSON: We now come to the main business, which is the debate on Iraq, and I have--

KWAME HOLMAN: Before the Gulf War, Britain's House of Commons endorsed sending its forces to the Gulf far more strongly than did the U.S. Congress. And today it again debated formal approval of such a commitment while the Congress has yet to act.

ROBIN COOK, Foreign Secretary, Great Britain: We still seek a peaceful end to the dispute. Military action is not inevitable. We do not want to take military action, and we would willingly stand down our forces if we can secure our objectives by diplomacy.

KWAME HOLMAN: Early in the debate Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, with Prime Minister Blair seated behind him, took questions and defended the government's position.

BERNIE GRANT, Labor Party: After the Gulf War, when Saddam was defeated, in an act of spite he set fire to all the oil fields in Kuwait, et cetera. Has my honorable friend considered that if as he says Saddam has anthrax and chemical weapons, has he considered what he would do if he's defeated in this current--in this current situation, and if that--if, as I suspect, he would let that--those chemical weapons are free in the rest of the region. Does he not think that the war should be the very, very last resort, and that every effort should be made to get a diplomatic solution to this crisis?

ROBIN COOK: I absolutely have no difficulty agreeing with my honorable friend's punch line. It is the view of all these sides of the chamber and I think on all the other sides of the chamber that military force should be used as the last resort. We are exploring every possible avenue to achieve a diplomatic solution. That is why we are strongly backing Kofi Annan, the secretary general, visiting Baghdad. But I have to say to my honorable friend if the secretary general of the United Nations does go to Baghdad, does discuss in good faith with Saddam Hussein the case for finding a diplomatic solution and then comes back unable to persuade Saddam Hussein to come up with a meaningful agreement, I then say to my honorable friend at that point we are nearing the point of last resort, this government firmly believes that in the modern world we need a United Nations that can speak with authority, with international community, and can act effectively against those who threaten the peace of member states. That is why we are determined that Saddam Hussein must recognize the authority of the U.N. by abandoning for all time his programs for weapons of mass destruction. We ask the House to show the same resolve by backing us tonight.

KWAME HOLMAN: That position was supported by members of Britain's opposition Conservative Party, including John Major, who was prime minister the last time Britain engaged in conflict with Iraq.

JOHN MAJOR, Conservative Party: We British have many longstanding friends and allies in the Gulf, and they will have said to the foreign secretary as they have said to many of his predecessors that they believe that the British have a better and deeper understanding of the wider region of the Middle East than many other western democratic nations. And for that reason I hope the government will continue to explain personally to our friends that we are not engaged in a knee-jerk reaction to Saddam Hussein; that we are concerned that there are great dangers in not holding international law, not least to those very friends in the Gulf who are so concerned at the moment. We have no hostility to the Iraqi people or the Iraqi nation as a whole. We have no intention--neither have the Americans or any other western democratic nation--of dismembering the state of Iraq now or at any stage in the future. That may seem self-evident to us in the coziness of the United Kingdom, but I say to the House it needs stating and restating all across the region of the Middle East because outside mosques in every Middle East country and after every prayer meeting a different message will be cried out daily to fuel anti-British and anti-American sentiment. And we should lose no opportunity to repeat that whenever we are in the Middle East or have access to a Middle Eastern audience.

KWAME HOLMAN: In the House of Commons, however, there were some voices of doubt. Tony Benn represented the view of those considered to be part of Labor's liberal wing.

TONY BENN, Labor Party: If we are realistic and we mustn't fool ourselves, that huge amount of fleet--what is it--30 ships and 1,000 aircraft--is not in the Gulf waiting to be withdrawn when Saddam gives a friendly noise to Kofi Annan. That is a fleet sent there to be used, and the House would be deceiving itself if it thought that what's called diplomatic initiative would actually avert its use. Now tonight--and I say this with regret--I shall vote against the government motion because the first victims of the bombing that I believe will be launched within a fortnight will be of innocent people, many not most of whom would like to see Saddam removed. This--the former prime minister from Huntington talked about collateral damage. The military men are very clever. You don't talk about hydrogen bombs but deterrence. You don't talk about people; you talk about collateral damage. You don't talk about power stations or sewage plants; you talk about asset. But the reality is that innocent people will be killed if the House votes tonight, as it manifestly will, to give the government the authority for military action.

KWAME HOLMAN: That prediction proved accurate. Tonight, the House of Commons voted 493 to 25 to have Britain use all necessary means to force Iraq to comply with U.N. weapons inspections.

REGIONS TOPICS RECENT PROGRAMS ABOUT US FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS / FEEDS:

Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station.
PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved.