As Chair of the General Synod Board of Social Responsibility, Bishop Tom also made a major contribution to the debate in the House of Lords.

He said: "It would be foolish to come to any firm conclusions after a first reading of the (Government's) dossier, but I am mostly persuaded that, whether or not Saddam Hussein is anywhere near to having a nuclear capability, he has biological and chemical weaponry and a modest number of missiles capable of delivering a lethal payload to neighbouring countries or to minorities in Iraq itself.

"That should not surprise us. In the mid-1990s, I was part of a delegation that visited Iraq. We met several Ministers there, and it was clear that Saddam's Government were interested in two things: the ending of sanctions and the rebuilding of their arsenal. The well-being of the Iraqi people has been sacrificed to those ends."

Evasion

Bishop Tom said that for 11 years the Iraqi regime "has sought to evade the terms, laid down by the United Nations, that brought a conditional end to the Gulf War.

"The regime has worked consistently to undermine support for the sanctions and inspections regime that was meant to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction. The grim conclusion to be drawn is that, unless that pressure is resisted, the regime will, sooner or later, achieve its objectives.

"I want simply to acknowledge the relentless pressure applied by the Iraqi regime in its attempts to develop weapons of mass destruction. That process must be resisted, but I maintain that containment, rather than military action, is, at this stage, the wiser course. The policy of containment - sanctions, no-fly zones and so on - has worked well enough for 11 years, Bishop Tom told the House.

"Paragraph 23 of the dossier shows that that policy is still effective in preventing the development of a nuclear capability. It is too soon to judge that that policy might not continue to work. It will require firm support from the UN Security Council. It will also require Iraq to allow the inspectors unhampered access, prompted by the stick of possible armed back-up and the carrot of relaxed sanctions. The Iraqi regime may well resist, as it has done in the past, but the attempt must be made."

Muslim people

He said "As well as being bishop of a diocese that includes large numbers of Muslim people, I am co-chair of the Inter-Faith Network of Britain and Ireland, which gives me the opportunity to speak to people of all faith traditions. Almost universally, British Muslims are hostile to the prospect of military action against Iraq.

"Most Muslims have little enthusiasm for Saddam Hussein and are well aware of the un-Islamic, secular, tyrannical nature of his regime. Their objections to President Bush's policy rest on three points, of which we must be aware.

"First, they are worried that the war on terror is becoming aligned with hostility to the Islamic world as such. Secondly, they complain that UN resolutions are applied selectively, outlawing Saddam Hussein while leaving other transgressors - notably Israel and Palestine - untouched. Thirdly, they are angry that little mention is made of the suffering of the Iraqi people as a consequence of the sanctions policy."

The opposition of most British Muslims to military action would not be greatly affected by the securing of some kind of UN authorisation, he said.

"The UN would be widely seen as having bowed to US pressure. Active support from other Arab states for an attack might be more significant in affecting opinion. We should continue to make every effort to mobilise the support of such states".

Drawing his speech to a close the Bishop reminded the House that... "Following 11th September last year, there was, in most parts of Britain, a revitalised sense of the importance of inter-faith relationships - particularly those between Christians and Muslims - as well as a severe challenge to the survival of such relationships. In the past few months, the general direction has been towards positive consolidation.

"However," he warned "channels of communication remain tenuous, and mutual trust and understanding are fragile. ... the effect of any military action in Iraq on international relations with Muslim states and on relations with Islamic communities at home would be problematic and unpredictable.

Equal risks

"There are, of course, equal risks associated with doing nothing in the face of the mounting evidence, if the UN Security Council refuses to adopt clear and robust resolutions or if Saddam Hussein refuses to allow the inspectors back in to do their job properly. In such circumstances, the use of military force might prove to be the least worst option. However, the world is not yet at that point. Please God, may we not get there," he said.