Goldsmith had doubts over legality of Iraq war
Attorney general was not bullied into backing invasion, says Blair's ex-chief of staff
Tuesday 19 January 2010
Latest in UK Politics
Related articles
On Facebook
From the blogs
Disclosure: We’d never even been to a club when we made our first single
For most of us, reaching eighteen years of age opens up a new world for exploration, spontaneity and...
Top of the posts: Drunken rants, the Western Fail and misogyny pushers
The most read blogs this week, as determined by stats.
Sepp Blatter: Penalty shoot-outs must remain, they’re football’s great leveller
As England supporters, we should scorn at any such deciding factor within football. On so many occas...
Why do some men consider the street as a female meat market?
Pronouncements on sexual inequality in the UK are normally met with an eye roll by my generation. As...
Lord Goldsmith, the former attorney general, remained unconvinced that military action against Saddam Hussein was legal even after a crucial United Nations resolution was secured, it has emerged.
Resolution 1441, signed in November 2002, was cited by Tony Blair and the Bush administration as the legal basis for invading Iraq. It stated that Saddam would be in "material breach" of UN orders if he failed to co-operate with the terms it set out.
However, official documents seen by the Iraq inquiry team suggest that Lord Goldsmith, responsible for advising the government on the legality of the invasion, was not persuaded that the resolution had resolved the legal question marks in the months after it had been agreed.
Lord Goldsmith warned Mr Blair that invading Iraq could be illegal in a letter sent in July 2002. It is the first time that his doubts after the intervention of the UN have been revealed by Sir John Chilcot's inquiry. A further resolution, giving clear permission for an invasion, was never secured.
Sir John said Lord Goldsmith told Number 10 that "he would need some time to reflect" on the implications of resolution 1441 once it had been signed. "It appears from what we read that he did not feel convinced at that time... that standing on its own it would be a secure base," he said.
Shortly before the invasion took place in March 2003, Lord Goldsmith told the Cabinet that he was persuaded that there was a legal basis for toppling Saddam. However, the inquiry heard yesterday that he had only given equivocal backing just weeks earlier and had come under pressure to make a decisive judgement.
Jonathan Powell, who was the chief of staff for the former prime minister, said that Mr Blair ordered his attorney general to give a "definitive" answer on the question of legality but denied that Lord Goldsmith had been bullied into giving his backing to the war.
In early March, Lord Goldsmith had told Mr Blair that a "reasonable case" could be made that resolution 1441 gave the go-ahead for military action. However, he also warned that a further UN resolution would be preferable.
The inquiry heard that he was called to a meeting with Mr Blair four days later, as attempts to secure the explicit approval from the UN failed. "I don't know if he was asked for a definitive opinion before 11 March. He was certainly asked for a definitive view on March 11," Mr Powell said.
"My experience of lawyers is often you have an 'on the one hand, on the other'. But sometimes they have to come down on a decision one way or the other on an issue. You can't have it both ways, and I think that is what is happening in this period."
In response to demands for clarity from the head of the military, Admiral Lord Boyce, Lord Goldsmith issued a further page of legal opinion authorising the invasion three days before it took place. Mr Powell added: "You are not able to bully the attorney general but he was bearing a very heavy burden."
Mr Powell said that Mr Blair and his team realised that intelligence was not foolproof but took action on the assumption that Saddam remained a threat because he had used weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in the past.
He strongly rejected the suggestion made by the former ambassador to Washington, Sir Christopher Meyer, that Mr Blair and President George W Bush had "signed in blood" an agreement to go to war during a meeting in Crawford, Texas. "I was at Crawford," he said. "Christopher Meyer was not at Crawford. He was at Waco 30 miles away. There was not an undertaking in blood to go to war with Iraq. There was no firm decision to go to war."
The suggestion that Lord Goldsmith had legal doubts after resolution 1441 was secured will put further pressure on Mr Blair when he appears before the inquiry. It was finally announced yesterday that Mr Blair will be questioned on 29 January. He will give evidence during two three-hour sessions.
Geoff Hoon, the former Defence Secretary, will appear at the inquiry today. He is expected to be asked about claims that he blocked army officials from ordering vital equipment because he feared military planning would become public. Lieutenant General Sir John Reith told the inquiry on Friday that he had warned Mr Hoon that the last minute orders meant that Britain could miss the US deadline for any invasion.
- 1 Mark Zuckerberg saved $111m by selling Facebook shares before stock slumped
- 2 Osborne adviser leaked budget information to Murdoch's man
- 3 Brazil rocked by abortion for 9-year-old rape victim
- 4 Schoolboy spiked brownies with cannabis in cookery class
- 5 News in pictures
- 6 Britain's waste: Now it's coming back to haunt us
- 7 Lawyers told Hunt to stay out of Sky deal
- 8 In pictures: The bewildering face of China
- 9 UK plans for euro-immigrants surge
- 10 Is Ridley Scott the most macho man in movies?
- 1 Mark Zuckerberg saved $111m by selling Facebook shares before stock slumped
- 2 Osborne adviser leaked budget information to Murdoch's man
- 3 Brazil rocked by abortion for 9-year-old rape victim
- 4 Society: The only way is Finland
- 5 Schoolboy spiked brownies with cannabis in cookery class
- 6 Fat? Really? Olympic hope laughs off official’s jibe – but others aren’t amused
- 7 'Hello mum, this is going to be hard for you to read ...'
- 8 African monkey meat that could be behind the next HIV
- 9 Coke reveals its secret: It may need to carry a cancer warning
- 10 French in uproar over oral sex anti-smoking posters
Experience the Heineken Hub
Get free wi-fi and exclusive i content while you enjoy a tasty pint of Heineken at participating pubs.
Can you imagine a career in teaching?
Be inspired to teach - let real teachers show you how rewarding the job can be.
Playing a game-changing role during the Games
Cisco is providing the solutions for London 2012's complex IT needs.
Enter the latest Independent competitions
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Business videos from commercial thought leaders
Watch the best in the business world give their insights into the world of business.
Career Services
Day In a Page
Ridley Scott: The most macho man in movies?
Gallic gourmets put France back on culinary map
The outsider: Margaret Howell
For men only: A pilgrimage to Mount Athos
Feeding a hungry world – or meddling with laws of nature?



Comments