The debate on Iraq in the House of Commons on February 26th was one of the best I have taken part in during my thirty-three years in the House. Members on both sides of the House spoke with passion and with feeling and at the end there was no clear-cut division on Party lines. Over 120 Labour MPs voted against the government and although the overwhelming majority of my Conservative colleagues voted in the Government lobby, a significant minority did not.
I had no hesitation in giving my support to the Prime Minister. At times like this party differences melt away. A Member has a duty always to put country and constituency before party and to exercise his judgement in what he considers to be the national interest. I have tried to do just that, and in my view the Prime Minister has been entirely right to take the tough line that he has over these last few, difficult months.
In doing so I believe he has behaved as a national leader, and with calm courage. It cannot have been easy for him to give this lead. His party has an honourable tradition of pacifism and there is, quite clearly, unease throughout the country at the thought of our going to war. Nevertheless my view is that if we allow one of the most ruthless and tyrannical rulers of modern times to thumb his nose to the international community, we will rue the day. The United Nations, powerless to act, would go the way of the League of Nations, its road to extinction paved by good intentions.
Whilst I do respect those who have genuine doubts and misgivings, I am bound to say that I find it slightly difficult to understand why so many who were ready to support action in the former Yugoslavia, against Milosevic, without any United Nations Resolution at all, are now opposing action in Iraq. No one could begin to pretend that Saddam Hussein is a less despicable tyrant than Milosevic. No one could credibly claim either that he is not a far more dangerous one to the international community as a whole. One is driven to the inescapable conclusion that it is precisely because Saddam is such an international danger that many would rather see him contained than confronted.
Whenever war is on the agenda every Christian politician has to wrestle with his conscience. To all those who would argue that the criteria for a just war do not exist I would respond that you cannot compromise with evil, and although I fervently hope, even at this late stage, that Saddam Hussein will comply, or that he will go into exile, if he does neither of those things Britain and the United States will, in my view, be wholly justified in taking action to remove him, even if the Security Council seeks to renege on its own, unanimously passed, Resolution 1441.
It is a foolish man who rushes into war, but it is equally foolish to encourage evil for the sake of a false and temporary peace. We are at the beginning of a new century and what happens in Iraq will help define the future for our children, and for our grandchildren. If we allow an evil tyrant to prevail we will advance into the century with no credible international organisations, and with our own credibility, and therefore the defence of our own people, at risk. That is why I have no hesitation in giving my support to the Prime Minister.
