This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/8471511.stm

The article has changed 12 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Straw speaks of Iraq war dilemma Straw speaks of Iraq war dilemma
(39 minutes later)
Jack Straw has told the Iraq inquiry that the decision to back the war was "the most difficult decision" he had ever taken. Jack Straw has said the decision to back the Iraq invasion was "the most difficult decision" he had ever taken.
In written evidence, the foreign secretary from 2001 to 2006 described the issue as a "profoundly difficult moral and political dilemma". In written evidence to the Iraq inquiry, the former foreign secretary described the issue as a "profoundly difficult moral and political dilemma".
Mr Straw is currently facing questions from the inquiry, becoming the first serving cabinet minister to do so. Appearing in person, Mr Straw said he regarded regime change as the objective of military action in Iraq as "improper and unlawful" and never supported it.
The panel is looking into the lead-up to the war, its conduct and aftermath. He is the first serving cabinet minister to give evidence.
'Critical decision''Critical decision'
In a written statement published as he began to be questioned, Mr Straw said he was "fully aware" that, as foreign secretary, his support for military action would be "critical" if the UK was to commit troops.In a written statement published as he began to be questioned, Mr Straw said he was "fully aware" that, as foreign secretary, his support for military action would be "critical" if the UK was to commit troops.
"If I had refused that, the UK's participation in the military action would not have been possible," he said."If I had refused that, the UK's participation in the military action would not have been possible," he said.
"There would almost certainly have been no majority in cabinet or in the Commons.""There would almost certainly have been no majority in cabinet or in the Commons."
Appearing before the inquiry, Mr Straw said policy towards Iraq before 9/11 - based on trying to contain Saddam Hussein - was "drifting". During the first hour of a planned three-hour appearance before the inquiry, Mr Straw pointed out that US had backed the principle of regime change in Iraq since 1998 but this was never British policy.
Asked about the impact of 9/11 on US and UK attitudes, Mr Straw said "it changed everything" in both countries. "It was not our policy in 2002 nor in 2003," he said. "There would have been no legal basis for it ever being our policy.
The attacks had "shattered" the US sense of security and meant Washington would no longer "tolerate failed states", he told the panel. Straw thought regime change would have been 'improper and unlawful' in spring 2002 - says it was not on UK agenda then Laura Kuenssberg class="" href="http://twitter.com/BBCLauraK">Follow Laura Kuenssberg's tweets
On Tuesday, former defence secretary Geoff Hoon became the first cabinet minister from 2003 to give evidence. He said he would never have "been a party" to such a policy: "I regarded it [the policy of regime change] as improper and self-evidently unlawful."
Ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair will appear on 29 January at the inquiry, which is looking into the run-up, conduct of and aftermath of the war. Asked about the impact of 9/11 on US and UK attitudes, Mr Straw said "it changed everything" in both countries and Washington would no longer "tolerate failed states".
Mr Straw is due to be questioned until 1700 GMT and is likely to be asked about a letter he wrote to Mr Blair in March 2002 - 10 days before the prime minister met US President George Bush at his ranch in Texas. During the spring of 2002, when Mr Blair had a crucial meeting with President George W Bush in Texas, Mr Straw said there was a "debate" taking place in government about the best way to deal with Iraq.
Before that meeting Mr Straw wrote to Mr Blair - in a letter subsequently leaked - that "regime change per se is no justification for military action: it could form part of the method of any strategy, but not a goal".
Asked whether No 10 had "pre-empted" the Foreign Office over Iraqi policy, Mr Straw said Mr Blair was "aware" that regime change could not be a basis for acting against Iraq nor could it be "disguised" as such.
However, asked to what extent his views differed from the prime minister, Mr Straw said the panel must ask Mr Blair that.
Mr Straw was asked about private correspondence between Mr Blair and President Bush at the time in which Mr Blair indicated the UK "would be" with the US if diplomatic efforts failed and it came to military action.
"Would I have written them in the same way? Probably not. I am not the same person."
UN effortsUN efforts
According to a Sunday Times report on the letter Mr Straw raised questions about whether military action would result in a better regime in Iraq and told Mr Blair "regime change per se is no justification for military action: it could form part of the method of any strategy, but not a goal". But he said the letters were part of a trust-building exercise between the two leaders which ultimately led to the US agreeing to seek UN approval for further action against Iraq.
As foreign secretary, he played a crucial role in efforts to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, which resulted in a resolution in November 2002 giving Saddam Hussein a "final opportunity" to disarm. Mr Straw said the UK insisted on a series of pre-conditions for its backing for military action against Iraq including its approval by the United Nations, that it must be a last resort and such a move must be lawful.
But UK and US efforts to secure a second resolution, which critics of the war said was needed to explicitly authorise military action, failed. As foreign secretary, Mr Straw played a crucial role in efforts to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, which resulted in a resolution in November 2002 giving Saddam Hussein a "final opportunity" to disarm.
INQUIRY TIMELINE January-February: Jack Straw, Tony Blair and other senior Labour figures to appear before the panel February: Inquiry to adjourn ahead of the general election campaignJune-July: Inquiry to resume and hear from Gordon Brown among othersReport set to be published in late 2010 or early 2011 Iraq inquiry: Day-by-day timeline Q&A: Iraq war inquiryINQUIRY TIMELINE January-February: Jack Straw, Tony Blair and other senior Labour figures to appear before the panel February: Inquiry to adjourn ahead of the general election campaignJune-July: Inquiry to resume and hear from Gordon Brown among othersReport set to be published in late 2010 or early 2011 Iraq inquiry: Day-by-day timeline Q&A: Iraq war inquiry
Asked if he felt Mr Straw had had any "doubts" about the case for military action, former cabinet secretary Lord Turnbull told the inquiry last week that if he did, he had not expressed them publicly. But UK and US efforts to secure a second resolution, which critics of the war said was needed to explicitly authorise military action, failed.
"What the cabinet saw of the foreign secretary was someone battling very hard indeed, it turns out with pretty poor material, presenting the case in the United Nations," he said. Mr Straw is set to be asked later about the legal basis for the war, which the cabinet did not discuss in detail before the conflict began.
"This didn't look like a man who was privately thinking 'this whole thing is flawed. I just don't think this thing adds up'." On Tuesday, former defence secretary Geoff Hoon became the first cabinet minister from 2003 to give evidence.
Mr Straw is also likely to be asked about the legal basis for the war, which the cabinet did not discuss in detail before the conflict began. Ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair will appear on 29 January at the inquiry, which is looking into the run-up, conduct of and aftermath of the war.
On Wednesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he had written to the inquiry chairman, Sir John Chilcot, to say he was "happy" to appear before the panel at any time of its choosing.On Wednesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he had written to the inquiry chairman, Sir John Chilcot, to say he was "happy" to appear before the panel at any time of its choosing.
He is due to give evidence after the general election but opposition parties say he should appear beforehand as he played a crucial role, then as chancellor, in spending decisions.He is due to give evidence after the general election but opposition parties say he should appear beforehand as he played a crucial role, then as chancellor, in spending decisions.
Wednesday's inquiry session saw former intelligence chief Sir David Omand tell the inquiry the "45-minute claim" in the 2002 intelligence dossier on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction had been "a bit of local colour" and was added because it was a rare example of detail that the intelligence services allowed to be included.