AS we head inexorably towards war with Iraq, I wish to explain why I believe that British participation on a conflict inspired by Washington would be folly.

The case for war has not yet been made, and the more the Government has sought to justify its position, the greater the inconsistencies that have emerged. There have been too many lies and too many fabrications advanced in the preamble to the conflict.

The genesis of the impending war with Iraq has nothing whatsoever to do with the imperatives propounded by the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary. The case for war has been discredited at every twist and turn of events since George W Bush announced his war on his "Axle of Evil".

The first reason given for the cynical push for war was that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction in defiance of United Nations Security Council resolutions. When this did not resonate with public opinion, due to a common realisation that many other "unstable" regimes ie North Korea and Pakistan also possessed weapons of mass destruction, the direction changed. It then became an extension of the war on terrorism with links between the Iraqi regime and Al Queda being claimed. This was quickly dropped when the security services, on both sides of the Atlantic, rubbished the idea. Then, despite early denials from British Government sources, the focus switched to Regime change, a concept that it transpired is contrary to the UN Charter.

In desperation, it was argued that Saddam Hussein's gassing of his own people in the '80s was sufficient proof that he was a ruthless despot. On that ground alone it is argued that war is justified.

This is particularly interesting, for it was in 1988 that 67 Labour MPs, myself included, urged the then government to act against the regime, through the UN, as a response to the gas attack on the town of Halabja. How ironic that this now forms part of the UK/US justification to attack Iraq. It is also noteworthy that no members of the present Government, who were in a position to do so, supported the back-bench motion those many years ago.

The doctrine of pre-emption now being established will serve to give the green light to any dictatorial regime in the world that wishes to extend its territory. I will not support going to war in the circumstances extant and a second resolution secured, through bribery, will not persuade me otherwise.

Terry Lewis MP

House of Commons

London