In the United Kingdom there were direct sales to both sides in the Iran–Iraq War. With an embargo in effect various companies also supplied Iraq and Iran by shipping materials through third-party countries and from those countries to the belligerents. While some of this exporting was legal, permitted or tolerated by parliament, Iraqi clandestine procurement operations were especially active in Britain.
Motives for policy towards Iraq
In spite of the British embargo, both the Iraqis and Iranians purchased British goods, from BMARC and other countries, using false end user certificates citing the destination as Singapore, Jordan or South Africa.
Economically, Britain wanted to continue an export trade with Iran and Iraq, which accounted for a total of 1 billion pounds per year. These guidelines, according to evidence to the Scott arms-to-Iraq inquiry, were subsequently secretly relaxed. After "The United Nations imposed an embargo, to try to restore stability to the region. Britain imposed its own rules—known as the "Howe guidelines" after the then Foreign Secretary, Sir Geoffrey Howe—restricting exports. While there was a strict ban on "lethal" exports, there was more flexibility if the proposed export, in the Government's view, would not prolong or exacerbate the conflict.
Export guidelines
It was later established that guidelines had been established but not followed. The Scott report showed that the "Howe Principles", or the "Government's stated policy on arms sales to Iran and Iraq was set out by Lord Howe in October 1985 when he was Foreign Secretary. He informed the House of the following set of guidelines to all deliveries of defence equipment to Iran and Iraq, implemented in December 1984 ..." had not been followed. The Guidelines were:
We should maintain our consistent refusal to supply any lethal equipment to either side; Subject to that overriding consideration, we should attempt to fulfil existing contracts and obligations; We should not, in future, approve orders for any defence equipment which, in our view, would significantly enhance the capability of either side to prolong or exacerbate the conflict; In the line with this policy, we should continue to scrutinise rigorously all applications for export licences for the supply of defence equipment to Iran and Iraq.
Scott report
The "Scott report" on British sales to Iraq, of "non-lethal" military-related goods, as distinct from actual weapons, which took three years to prepare under the direction of senior high court judge Sir Richard Scott, criticized government handling, but also rejected that Members of Parliament tried to bias the court trying the Matrix Churchill defendants. In particular, it singled out Attorney General Sir Nicholas Lyell and Treasury Chief Secretary William Waldegrave, Baron Waldegrave of North Hill for their errors.
One of the main problems highlighted in the report was the decision of the government not to inform Parliament of reforms to arms export laws for fear of public outcry. The report concluded government policy towards the export of non-lethal military goods was changed following the Iran–Iraq ceasefire in 1988, in a way that should have been reported to the Commons.
Scott's report explained the British government's secret decision to supply Saddam with even more weapons-related equipment after the Halabja chemical weapon on Iraqi Kurds by their own government. Former Foreign Secretary Howe had written that the ceasefire ending the Iran–Iraq War could mean "major opportunities for British industry" An official working for Howe, and quoted in the Scott Report, indicated Howe such an initiative kept quiet: "It could look very cynical if so soon after expressing outrage about the treatment of the Kurds, we adopt a more flexible approach to arms sales."
Export controls
Member of Parliament Roger Berry, speaking in the House of Commons, said that the only truly important thing about export control is the identity of the true end user, who may not be the country on the end user certificate. "As the arms to Iraq scandal taught us, what matters is who gets the arms and what they do with them. The licence application might have said that the weapons were going to Jordan, but they ended up in Iraq.? He said the end-use information on the export license needs to be verified.