SUE DOUGHTY MP STATEMENT ON IRAQ

12.00.00am UTC (GMT +0000) Wed 15th Jan 2003

The government have dispatched ships to the Gulf and announced that reservists are to be called up. Within a few weeks the United States will have enough troops in the region to mount an invasion of Iraq. The drift towards war is now looking more like a march, despite the opposition of the majority of the British population.

If there is to be war then my thoughts go out to our servicemen and women and their families. We must also think of the Iraqi people, who have suffered for so long under Saddam Hussein and will suffer most from a war. We should expect high civilian casualties, as Saddam has vowed to place his troops inside the cities, putting military targets side by side with people's homes.

But this war is not inevitable. I have received dozens of letters from constituents who are opposed to an invasion of Iraq and so far only two in favour. Demonstrations against the war are taking place up and down the country. A lobby of parliament by anti-war campaigners is planned for the 21st of January and a national demonstration and march through London will take place on the 15th of February.

I have been speaking out against an invasion of Iraq in Westminster, both on the floor of the House of Commons and at public meetings. Knowing that I have the support of the overwhelming majority of constituents who have contacted me has been a great encouragement.

Until recently the government has been uncritical of the United States. However pressure on Tony Blair is beginning to pay off and there is a much stronger indication that he will not go to war without the full support of the United Nations. While UN approval would be essential before an invasion of Iraq, it must not be seen simply as a technical obstacle that the United States can clear by piling up pressure on the members of the Security Council until they cave in to demands for war. A clear moral case must be made in addition to the legal case.

It is also important that no countries should have their support for an invasion fostered by promises of a share in Iraqi oil reserves. The British government has been far too ambiguous on this point, but there can be no moral justification for this kind of profit from war.

The independence of the United Nations must be respected and Hans Blix and his team of weapons inspectors must be given all the time they need. But the more that the hawks in Washington portray war as inevitable, the less incentive Saddam Hussein has to comply with the inspections.

We would all like to see Saddam Hussein removed from power, but at what cost? Nobody would be happier to see the back of Saddam than the people of Iraq, yet they are not asking for this war. It is the Iraqi citizens who will suffer most. Unwilling conscripts and innocent civilians will bear the brunt of an invasion, while Saddam shields himself behind them.

If the government of the United States is correct in its assertions that Saddam Hussein is continuing to hide weapons of mass destruction, we must consider carefully if exposing our troops to this danger is really a sensible approach. Taking the longer road of doggedly pursuing diplomacy may be slow and at times frustrating, as Saddam continues to play his usual games. But I believe it would be preferable to the huge loss of life for Iraqi civilians and our own servicemen and women that would be the inevitable result of war.

An invasion would also bring wider dangers. Many of those constituents who have contacted me are particularly concerned that an invasion of Iraq will increase the terrorist threat to Britain. After the terrible attack on the World Trade Centre we must focus on strengthening our relations with Islamic countries rather than handing a propaganda victory to the terrorists that will help bring them new recruits.

We must remember that there are other major problems in the Middle East that will be further inflamed by an invasion of Iraq. Efforts to re-establish talks between Israel and Palestine must not be undermined. They will need our strong support to overcome the years of violence between the two communities. It is essential that the United States gives a firm and consistent message to the Israeli government that they must not react disproportionately, but be bold enough to end the cycle of violence.

Back home, as well as the worry for those with families and friends posted in the Gulf, we would have to contend with the wider costs of a war. The global economy remains poised to go into recession and the Chancellor has already had to increase borrowing to keep to his spending commitments. The cost of war would put another hole in his budget. Medical reservists will be sent to the Gulf, putting further strain on the NHS when it already lacks sufficient capacity to meet the nation's health needs.

Toppling Saddam Hussein will present a whole new set of problems that we must be prepared for. There is no obvious government in waiting because of Saddam's brutal suppression of any opposition. The United Nations would be the obvious choice to fill this void while a civilian government is formed, but in the United States' plans the UN would only have a limited role. Although the US have proposed that a civil administrator is appointed by the UN, they would have to work with a US military commander who would take charge for at least the first 18 months. Iraq's oil fields would be under US military control during this time. To the rest of the Arab world this would look like American colonialism.

We must be bold enough to be an honest friend to the United States. Sometimes you have to tell a friend when they are wrong. Opposing the policies of the current administration in the United States is not anti-American. Many Americans are also opposed to an invasion of Iraq and are pinning their hopes on European countries making a strong case for diplomatic alternatives to war and holding firm on the rule of international law and the independence of the United Nations. If we give President Bush the green light we will be failing them.

I believe that there is still time to let Tony Blair know that the British people are not persuaded of the need for this war and that he will be making a grave mistake if he commits our forces to join those of President Bush in an invasion of Iraq. I will continue to voice my opposition in Westminster and hope to see many people at the lobby of parliament, the national demonstration in London and the other demonstrations around the country, letting the government know that we do not want this war