Mr President, Commissioner Patten, President-in-Office of the Council, as we speak, there is reason to hope that the new war with Iraq will not take place. It is not absurd to imagine that the resolution currently in the process of being adopted by the United Nations Security Council could finally be drawn up to encourage disarmament in Iraq rather than to legitimise a military intervention there. That would be a great victory of wisdom over irresponsibility, but there is still a long way to go. And can we do anything, while the decision is that of the member countries of the Security Council? I am sure that we can, as it is clear that the requirements of our societies and the political initiatives taken by various States have greatly influenced the development of the positions of the main Heads of State, starting with George Bush himself. His goal was to change the regime in Baghdad. Apparently today the international community has only one possible objective, the disarmament of Iraq. He ordered the UN to either be on the side of the US or to stay on the sidelines. He nevertheless seems to understand that the framework of the United Nations is difficult to circumvent. He had put forward a theory of pre-emptive war. He now stresses that military action is not necessarily imminent or inevitable. Nobody is fooled. The American President has not given up any of his plans, but he is perhaps beginning to realise that international political life is not a western in which he can play the role of sheriff. I believe it is time to promote the mission of disarmament inspectors as an alternative solution to war. It was these inspectors who, until 1998, prevented Saddam Hussein from acquiring the atomic bomb and who destroyed stocks of chemical and biological weapons and their means of manufacture, military research installations, missiles and launch pads. Today, they say, their experience is greater still and their equipment more sophisticated. They are ready to start work again immediately. One of them, however, the American Scott Ritter, opportunely suggests that, upon their return, the embargo should be lifted. This mercilessly cruel burden was imposed twelve years ago on the population. My group, in conjunction with others, is going to take initiatives in this spirit, which you are all welcome to join. Furthermore, my group would consider highly useful a further declaration by the Council and the Commission on the new strategic doctrine published by the Bush administration on 20 September. I find it inconceivable that the European Union is silent on this text which magnifies what is described as the unparalleled force of the United States and emphasises their determination, to paraphrase, to act alone, if necessary as a pre-emptive measure, to extend the triumph of freedom. We cannot remain inactive in the face of the official confirmation of a doctrine which would undoubtedly lead to war in Iraq and which would lead to nothing less than the destruction of the collective security system set up around the Charter of the United Nations following the victory of democracies over Nazism. Lastly, we are still waiting for the beginning of the first stages of the implementation of the last parliamentary resolution on the Middle East. While George Bush draws the world’s attention to Baghdad, however, his protégé, who, not long ago, he classed as a man of peace even though he is violating all the resolutions of the Security Council concerning his country, is attacking the Palestinians with indescribable cruelty, thereby exposing his own people to a new infernal cycle of vengeance and hatred. Europe still needs to prove itself on all these points which, in fact, form a whole. The status of world player cannot be decreed; it must be earned. (Applause)

Political group: GUE-NGL