Prime Minister's Statement to Parliament
[04 October 2001]
The Prime Minister has made a statement to Parliament concerning the terrorist attacks in the US.
The following is the transcript of the Prime Minister's statement.
I am grateful to you for recalling Parliament on a second occasion so that the House can consider developments since it last met.
Then the scale of 11 September tragedy was still unclear. Even today we do not yet know the precise numbers of those feared dead. But a bleak picture has emerged: there are up to 7,000 feared dead, including many British victims and others from 70 different countries. Many were Muslims. It cannot be said too often: this atrocity appalled decent Muslims everywhere and is wholly contrary to the true teaching of Islam. And we condemn unreservedly racist attacks on British Muslims here, most recently at an Edinburgh Mosque.
These acts are without any justification whatever and the full force of the law will be used against those who do them.
I pay tribute again to all those in America who have been involved in dealing with the human consequences of the attacks. The rescue services and medical workers who worked tirelessly and with devotion in the most harrowing conditions imaginable. I pay tribute to our own consular staff in New York and London and the family counsellors and Metropolitan Police officers who have supported relatives of the victims. And, above all, to the relatives themselves. Those I met in New York, still uncertain finally of the fate of their loved ones, bore their grief with immense dignity which deserves the admiration of us all.
Since 11 September intensive efforts have taken place here and elsewhere to investigate these attacks and determine who is responsible. Our findings have been shared and co-ordinated with those of our allies, and are clear.
They are:
First, it was Usama Bin Laden and Al Qaida, the terrorist network which he heads, that planned and carried out the atrocities on 11 September;
Second, that Usama Bin Laden and Al Qaida were able to commit these atrocities because of their close alliance with the Taleban regime in Afghanistan which allows them to operate with impunity in pursuing their terrorist activity.
I will later today put in the Library of the House of Commons a document detailing the basis for our conclusions. The document covers the history of Usama Bin Laden, his relations with the Taleban, what we know of the acts of terror he has committed; and some of what we know in respect of 11 September. I enter a major caveat, much of the evidence we have is intelligence and highly sensitive. It is not possible without compromising people or security to release precise details and fresh information is daily coming in. But I hope the House will find it useful at least as an interim assessment. The Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Liberal Democrats have seen the full basis for the document on Privy Council terms. For myself and all other Government Ministers who have studied the full information, we have absolutely no doubt that Bin Laden and his network are responsible for the attacks on 11 September. That was also the unanimous view of the NATO members who were taken through the full facts on 2 October. Much more of the evidence in respect of earlier atrocities can be released in greater detail since it is already subject to court proceedings; and this in itself is powerful.
Indeed, there is nothing hidden about Bin Laden�s agenda. He openly espouses the language of terror; has described terrorising Americans as "a religious and logical obligation"; and in February 1998 signed a fatwa stating that "the killing of Americans and their civilian and military allies is a religious duty".
As our document shows, he has been responsible for a number of terrorist outrages over the past decade.
The attack in 1993 on US military personnel serving in Somalia � 18 US military personnel killed.
In 1998, the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. 224 people killed and over 4500 injured.
Attempted bombings in Jordan and Los Angeles at the turn of the millennium, thankfully thwarted.
The attack on the USS Cole nearly a year ago which left 17 crew members killed and 40 injured.
The attacks on 11 September bear all the hallmarks of a Bin Laden operation: meticulous long-term planning; a desire to inflict mass casualties; a total disregard for civilian lives (including Muslims); multiple simultaneous attacks; and the use of suicide attackers.
I can now confirm that of the 19 hijackers identified from the passenger lists of the four planes hijacked on 11 September, at least three of these hijackers have already been positively identified as known associates of Bin Laden, with a track record in his camps and organisation. The others are being investigated still.
Of the three, one has also been identified as playing key roles in both the East African Embassy attacks and the USS Cole attack.
Since the attacks, we have obtained the following intelligence: shortly before 11 September, Bin Laden told associates that he had a major operation against America under preparation; a range of people were warned to return to Afghanistan because of action on or around 11 September; and most importantly, one of Bin Laden�s closest lieutenants has said clearly that he helped with the planning of the 11 September attacks and has admitted the involvement of the Al Qaida organisation. There is other intelligence we cannot disclose of an even more direct nature indicating guilt.
The closeness of Bin Laden�s relationship with the Taleban is also plain. He provides the Taleban with troops, arms and money to fight the Northern Alliance. He is closely involved with the Taleban�s military training, planning and operations. He has representatives in the Taleban�s military command structure. Forces under the control of Usama Bin Laden have fought alongside the Taleban in the civil war in Afghanistan.
The Taleban regime, for its part, has provided Bin Laden with a safe haven within which to operate, and allowed him to establish terrorist training camps. They jointly exploit the Afghan drugs trade. In return for active Al Qaida support the Taleban allow Al Qaida to operate freely, including planning, training and preparing for terrorist activity. In addition they provide security for the stockpiles of drugs.
Mr Speaker, in the face of this evidence, our immediate objectives are clear. We must bring Bin Laden and other Al Qaida leaders to justice and eliminate the terrorist threat they pose. And we must ensure that Afghanistan ceases to harbour and sustain international terrorism. If the Taleban regime will not comply with that objective, we must bring about change in that regime to ensure that Afghanistan�s links to international terrorism are broken.
Since the House last met, we have been working ceaselessly on the diplomatic, humanitarian and military fronts.
I can confirm that we have had initial discussions with the US about a range of military capabilities with which Britain can help and have already responded positively to this. We will consider carefully any further requests and keep the House informed as appropriate, about such requests. For obvious reasons I cannot disclose the exact nature of our discussions. But I am fully satisfied they are consistent with our shared objectives.
I believe the humanitarian coalition to help the people of Afghanistan to be as vital as any military action itself.
Afghanistan was in the grip of a humanitarian crisis even before the events of 11 September. Four years of drought, on top of over two decades of conflict, have forced millions of people to leave the country; and have left millions more dependent on international humanitarian aid.
Last week the United Nations launched an appeal for $584 million to meet the needs of vulnerable people in and around Afghanistan. The appeal covers the next six months.
The international community has already pledged sufficient funds to meet the most immediate needs. The British Government has contributed �25 million, nearly all of which has already been allocated to UN and other agencies. We have also made available a further �11 million for support for the poorest communities in Pakistan, especially those most directly affected by the influx of refugees.
I know President Bush will shortly announce details of a major US programme of aid.
I have been in detailed consultation with the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees Ruud Lubbers and other leaders. Kofi Annan has now appointed Lakhdar Brahimi to be his high level coordinator for the humanitarian effort in and around Afghanistan. We will give Mr Brahimi all the support we can, to help ensure that the UN and the whole of the international community comes together to meet the humanitarian challenge.
Action is already in hand to cope with additional outflows of refugees. UNHCR are working with the governments of the region to identify sites for additional refugee camps. The first UNHCR flight of relief supplies, including tents donated by the British Government, arrived in Iran yesterday. A second flight will depart at the end of this week, carrying more tents, plastic sheeting and tarpaulins, so that we can provide essential shelter for refugees.
We are also stepping up the effort to get food into Afghanistan, before the winter snows begin. A UNICEF convoy carrying blankets and other supplies left Peshawar for Kabul on Tuesday. A World Food Programme convoy carrying over 200 tonnes of wheat arrived in Kabul on Monday. Further WFP convoys have left for Afghanistan from Pakistan and Turkmenistan.
We will do what we can to minimise the suffering of the Afghan people as a result of the conflict; and we commit ourselves to work with them afterwards inside and outside Afghanistan to ensure a better, more peaceful future free from the repression and dictatorship that is their present existence.
On the diplomatic front, over the past three weeks the Foreign Secretary and I have been in intensive contact with foreign leaders from every part of the world. In addition, the Foreign Secretary has visited the Middle East and Iran. I have visited Berlin, Paris and Washington for consultations with Chancellor Schroeder, President Chirac and President Bush respectively. Later today I will travel to Moscow to meet with President Putin.
What we have encountered is an unprecedented level of solidarity and commitment to work together against terrorism. This is a commitment that spans all continents, cultures and religions, reinforced by attacks like the one on the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly in Srinagar which killed over 30 innocent people.
We have already made good progress in taking forward an international agenda. Last week the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 1373. This makes it mandatory for all states to prevent and suppress terrorist financing and requires the denial of safe haven to who finance, plan, support or commit terrorist acts.
The European Union too has taken firm action. Transport, interior, finance and foreign ministers have all met to concert an ambitious and effective European response: enhancing police co-operation; speeding up extradition; putting an end to the funding of terrorism; and strengthening air security.
We are also looking closely at our national legislation. In the next few weeks, the Home Secretary intends to introduce a package of legislation to supplement existing legal powers in a number of areas. It will be a carefully-appraised set of measures: tough, but balanced and proportionate to the risk we face. It will cover the funding of terrorism. It will increase our ability to exclude and remove those whom we suspect of terrorism and who are seeking to abuse our asylum procedures. It will widen the law on incitement to include religious hatred. We will bring forward a bill to modernise our extradition law.
It will not be a knee-jerk reaction. But I emphasise we do need to strengthen our laws so that, even if necessary only in a small number of cases, we have the means to protect our citizens� liberty and our national security.
We have also ensured, insofar as is possible, that every reasonable measure of internal security is being undertaken. We have in place a series of contingency plans, governing all forms of terrorism. These plans are continually reviewed and tested regularly and at all levels. In addition, we continue to monitor carefully developments in the British and International economy. Certain sectors here and around the world have inevitably been seriously affected, though I repeat the fundamentals of all the major economies, including our own, remain strong. The reduction of risk from terrorist mass action is important also to economic confidence as 11 September shows. So there is every incentive in this respect also, to close down the Bin Laden network.
Mr Speaker, three weeks on from the most appalling act of terrorism the world has ever witnessed.
The coalition is strong. Military plans are robust. The humanitarian plans are falling into place.
And the evidence against Bin Laden and his network is overwhelming.
The Afghan people are not our enemy. For they have our sympathy and they will have our support.
Our enemy is Usama Bin Laden and the Al Qaida network who were responsible for the events of 11 September. The Taleban regime must yield them up or become our enemy also. We will not act for revenge. We will act because for the protection of our people and our way of life, including confidence in our economy, we need to eliminate the threat Bin Laden and his terrorism represent. We act for justice. We act with world opinion behind us. And we have an absolute determination to see justice done, and this evil of mass terrorism confronted and defeated.
24 September 2001
Foreign Secretary to visit Iran and the Middle East
The Foreign Secretary Jack Straw will make his first visits to Iran, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and Egypt this week. The visit to Iran is the first by a British Foreign Secretary since the 1979 Revolution.
Mr Straw will hold talks with senior figures in all the countries he is visiting about the international response to the terrorist attacks on the US and the regional situation.
LOBBY BRIEFING: 11AM MONDAY 1 OCTOBER 2001
US TERROR ATTACKS
Phonecalls
The Prime Minister�s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said
that the Prime Minister had been at Chequers over the
weekend and had now departed for the Party Conference
in Brighton. He had spoken to President Bush for about
half an hour on Saturday. The conversation had covered
the military and diplomatic fronts and had also
focussed on the humanitarian effort. He had also
spoken to Kofi Annan yesterday about humanitarian
matters. They had discussed some of the different
ideas relating to how we could co-ordinate the
humanitarian effort across the different agencies. The
PMOS pointed out that Chancellor Schroeder was
attending the Party Conference today and no doubt
would meet the Prime Minister there. He did not rule
out the possibility of other phonecalls today and
tomorrow.
Humanitarian Aid
The PMOS advised journalists that the first of two
flights this week carrying humanitarian aid in the
form of emergency shelters to Afghan refugees in Iran
was due to leave RAF Manston this evening. The flight
would be carrying 40 tonnes of winterised tents (1,300
tents in total), rolls of plastic sheeting and canvas
tarpaulins. The total cost was �400,000, which was
part of the �25m of aid which had been announced two
weeks ago. A further �11m had been allocated to
Pakistan on Thursday.
Anti-Terrorism Measures/Legislation
Asked if we were giving any thought to the possibility
of allowing the use of wiretap evidence in court, the
PMOS said he wouldn�t encourage journalists down that
route. We were looking at a whole raft of different
issues, principally focussing on how we could make it
easier to detain, deport and extradite terrorist
suspects. As the Prime Minister had indicated on Frost
yesterday, an Emergency Terrorism Bill could be
expected within four to six weeks. This would look at
a number of different areas in relation to asylum and
detaining and deporting suspects. Other issues which
were also being considered carefully included data
sharing between the Inland Revenue, Customs and Law
Enforcement Agencies. Asked why there was a reluctance
to allow wiretap evidence in court, the PMOS said it
would not be helpful to get into �whys� and
�wherefores� as we had not made any announcements yet.
The Bill would be published shortly. Clearly,
judgements had to be made as to the most effective
vehicles for countering terrorist activity and, if we
went down a certain route, whether that might have a
contradictory effect at another stage of the chain of
operations.
Asked whether new extradition measures could be
applied retrospectively, the PMOS said that issues of
retrospection were being looked at, but not
necessarily. He said that at the moment we had no
powers to detain terrorist suspects who had exhausted
the asylum process and had had their applications
turned down but who we were unable to return to their
country of origin possibly because of issues relating
to human rights. Obviously we would have to look
carefully at whether we could introduce and use such
powers against people who were here and considered a
threat to national security. In answer to further
questions, the PMOS cautioned journalists against
expecting the Prime Minister to announce specific
details of the measures we might be taking in his
statement to the House on Thursday.
ID Cards/Devolution
Asked the current position on ID cards, the PMOS said
the position remained as set out by the Prime
Minister. It was obviously important to weigh up all
the different arguments. As the Prime Minister had
said yesterday, the key to this was the issue of
effectiveness - i.e. whether, by introducing ID cards,
we would be able to achieve what we wanted to achieve.
A whole range of different arguments were being looked
at - but at a slightly slower pace than some of the
other issues he had already set out.
Asked about reports at the weekend about the
possibility of introducing Citizens Cards, the PMOS
said that this was one view which had been put
forward. Different arguments were being mounted on all
sides in terms of what an ID Card might do, what it
might be used for, how it might work, how secure it
would be, how effective it might be, what it would
cost and so on. Discussion about this issue was
continuing in a calm, measured way within Government.
He reiterated the Prime Minister�s point expressed
yesterday that the key to such a proposal was the
issue of effectiveness.
Asked if the Government was concerned about reports
that the Scottish Parliament would not back the
introduction of ID Cards, the PMOS said we had not
made proposals yet. Of course there would be
discussions with the devolved administrations in terms
of taking forward the emergency terrorism measures. We
would hope that by doing so we would be able to
achieve cross-party support for these measures. We
also hoped that it would speed up their passage onto
the statute book. Obviously that did not mean that
debate and discussion would be curtailed. In answer to
further questions about individual rights, the PMOS
said that in trying to bring about these changes, the
Prime Minister hoped he would be able to win people
round on the basis of the arguments. Everyone would
accept that the events of 11 September had changed the
balance of the arguments in respect of issues relating
to people�s individual rights and terrorism.
Bin Laden
Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with the US
Administration�s assertion that it had no reason to
believe anything the Taliban said following the
Taliban�s latest statement that they knew where Bin
Laden was and were protecting him, the PMOS said he
wouldn�t disagree with anything the US Government had
said. It was clear that anything that came from the
Taliban had to be treated with considerable caution.
If it was true that the Taliban knew where Bin Laden
was, this underlined the stark choice facing them.
They had to hand him over, dismantle the terror camps
and prove that they had done so - or face the
consequences. They knew what they had to do. They
could do it now.
Asked if there was a timetable for the Taliban to make
their choice before having to face the consequences,
the PMOS said there was no timeframe. President Bush
had set out to Congress the ultimatum to the Taliban.
We hoped they understood the seriousness of the
situation. As the days passed, the international
coalition was continuing to be built and the necessary
planning was going ahead. Asked what further work was
needed to build the coalition, the PMOS said there
were obviously two phases in which the coalition was
involved. First bringing those responsible to account.
The international community, almost without exception,
had voiced its horror at the events of 11 September.
The UN Security Council Resolution in the days
afterwards talked of those responsible being brought
to account and those harbouring them being
accountable. The second part of the equation was the
dismantling of the machinery of terror. That would
require action at all levels on the financial front
and the diplomatic front, as well as individual
countries looking at their own domestic laws, as we
were now doing. The coalition was widening and
deepening on a daily basis.
Asked if any thought had been given to what a
post-Taliban Afghanistan might look like, the PMOS
said that it was important to be clear about our
objectives: to bring those responsible to account and
to dismantle the machinery of terror. As the Prime
Minister had said, the Taliban were harbouring Bin
Laden and were also host to a network of terror camps.
The choice was theirs as to whether they wished to
co-operate with the international community to bring
those responsible for the atrocity in the US to
justice. If they did not do that, they would become an
obstacle to us achieving that objective. If that was
the case, they would therefore have to face the
consequences - one of which could clearly be their
removal. Questioned further, the PMOS pointed out that
Afghanistan was made up of many different tribes and
ethnic mixes. It was a very complex country. In the
longer term, it would be most beneficial for the
people there to have an open society which represented
all the different social tribal mixes. Clearly,
however, we were some way off that point. Asked if the
Prime Minister agreed with Peter Hain�s comment that
he would welcome a popular uprising against the
Taliban, the PMOS said it was clear that the Taliban
regime had inflicted great suffering on the people of
Afghanistan. Even prior to 11 September, there had
been 4-5 million refugees fleeing the country as a
result of the civil war, drought and famine. It was a
regime which had no regard for basic human rights,
particularly those of women. That said, however, the
Taliban had a choice. It was not an objective as such
to remove them from power. The objective was to bring
Bin Laden and his associates to justice and to get rid
of the terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. On a
more general point, our desire had always been to see
a broad based legitimate Government in Afghanistan.
Our fight was against terrorism and those who
supported it.
Asked if there had been any contact between the
British Government and the Northern Alliance, the PMOS
said not as far as he was aware. We understood the
concerns the Northern Alliance had in relation to the
regime in Afghanistan. However, he pointed out that
the Alliance was a solely Tajik movement. A broad
based Government in Afghanistan would need to be truly
representative of the country�s different ethnic
tribes.
Intelligence
Asked if the Prime Minister would use his statement to
the Commons on Thursday to set out any of the evidence
he had seen which linked Bin Laden to the terror
attacks in the US, the PMOS said we were still looking
at what information could be put in the public domain.
Obviously in a situation like this we would not want
to jeopardise intelligence sources and intelligence
gathering. At the appropriate time and when we were in
a position to do so, we hoped to be able to set out
the evidence to which the Prime Minister had referred.
Asked if this would be a joint UK/US paper, the PMOS
said that we were looking at our own evidence at this
stage.
NORTHERN IRELAND
Asked about the possibility of taking action against
the LVF following the murder of Martin O�Hagan at the
weekend, the PMOS said that clearly this was an
appalling act. We condemned absolutely such barbarism.
We did not yet know who was responsible. The Chief
Constable and RUC were currently conducting their own
investigations and we were unable to draw any
conclusions at this point. Over the weekend, Ronnie
O�Flanagan had said that he did not believe the UDA
were involved. As to whether the LVF were responsible,
we would have to wait and see how the investigation
progressed. As John Reid had repeated at the weekend,
all ceasefires were kept under constant review. The
Government would not hesitate to specify any group
breaking its ceasefire agreement.