Click here for more information.
STATEMENT BY THE SPOKESPERSON
FRENCH MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
October 8, 2002
Q - Can you tell us about the intensive consultations that are continuing at the UN between France and several members of the Security Council?
Consultations are continuing.
My American counterpart, Richard Boucher, said yesterday that at the level of concepts, things are beginning to come together but that there was still a lot of work to be done. I personally share his feeling. We also listened with interest to President Bush's speech last night and in that context we are working on the decisions that the Security Council will be taking. We're not yet at the point of working on a single text but the dialogue we're having is constructive. What we want now is to move forward quickly to get the inspectors back.
Q - So there's a synthesis of the French and American texts?
We're having a very constructive dialogue, and the minister particularly is in regular contact with his counterparts, with Colin Powell especially.
Q - Are we closer now to an agreement on a new resolution that we were eight weeks ago?
The work is constructive, and we are indeed moving forward.
Q - Do you consider that President Bush's speech on Iraq goes in that direction?
I won't comment on the speech by President Bush but I note that the speech is in line with the debate in the Security Council on preparing the decisions it is going to take. That direction is being confirmed were it necessary. (...)
Q - Is it your sense that a unanimous resolution in the Council, without a veto, is possible?
Certainly, otherwise we would not be making all this effort to achieve it. We're not thinking in terms of impasses, we're working to build unity. But a lot of work still has to be done.
Q - If the first resolution were implemented, would that make the second superfluous?
First of all, part of your question is hypothetical. But it is obvious that when we think of a two-stage approach, the objective in the first resolution is to clearly assert that Iraq must comply with the Security Council resolutions and the obligations it has or will have regarding the inspections. In the event Iraq fails to comply with its obligations then the Security Council would meet again to assess the itaution. So that's the scenario and only that. On the other hand if Iraq complies with the resolutions in full, clearly there is no need for a second resolution.
Q - So then a second will be needed to lift the sanctions?
Yes, but when we refer to a two-stage approach, we're not referring to that--that's another aspect--we're thinking of the inspectors' return.
Q - The two-stage approach is in the event Iraq refuses?
Our goal is to stop the danger of proliferation. When we speak of a resolution in two stages, we're addressing proliferation. In order to do so, to get Iraq to comply with the resolutions regarding the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to get the inspectors back in so that they can work effectively, without impediments and without constraints, we're proposing a two-stage approach. Then there are other international aspects of the Iraqi question, the issue of sanctions, and finding a way out of the crisis.
Q - Would France prefer a single-stage approach at the risk of being ambiguous?
We're not in a situation where we prefer one solution to another. We are in a situation where are mobilized and determined to obtain a clear and unambiguous result. We are determined to give ourselves the means to succeed. We believe that the most effective and the most legitimate way is a two-stage approach.