Iraq and the UN

The Prime Minister's dossier makes a strong case for action. That action should be the UN weapons inspectors re-entering Iraq.

Listening to Mr Blair when Parliament was recalled I was pleased to hear the continual reference to the United Nations. That was in marked contrast to what he and President Bush seemed to be arguing this summer.

Action without the UN would not only be questionable in terms of international law but would also be highly dangerous. Dangerous in terms of the precedent it would set. Dangerous because of its effect on stability in the Middle East. Dangerous as a recruiting sergeant for terrorism and extremism.

Even with the backing of UN resolutions, we must be cautious. Military action in the Gulf War and Afghanistan had the backing of a wide international coalition, including leading Arab countries. That was crucial in minimising the backlash and achieving military objectives.

There is a risk with this strategy - that Saddam already possesses or is near to possessing nuclear weapons or the capacity to launch long range missiles, and would use them prior to the inspectors finding and destroying them,

On the balance of evidence, and given the huge risks of "pre-emptive "military action, that's the risk we must take.