Iraq war UN route 'not terribly welcome'
Updated on 27 January 2010
Lord Goldsmith has told the Iraq war inquiry the idea that UN approval would be necessary to justify an attack on Iraq was not "terribly welcome".
So other than Tony Blair himself, this is the testimony we have all been waiting for at the Iraq war inquiry - the attorney general himself - the man who started out with such doubts about the legality of going to war - and ended up endorsing Tony Blair's decision to join the invasion. We have heard what others made of his "journey"; now, with his own evidence, everything will become clear.
Well, not quite everything. Certain documents relating to his evidence are not allowed to be declassified, the inquiry chairman revealed. Lord Goldsmith shared his frustration - and said there were documents he would also like to see made public.
But moving onto the real substance. Lord Goldsmith said that before UN resolution 1441 was passed in November 2002 (the one that said Iraq was in "material breach" of the ceasefire), there were only three things which would have justified war.
Self defence, which he ruled out because there was no evidence of any "imminent threat" from Iraq. Secondly, averting a humanitarian crisis, which he said justified the use of no-fly zones, but not military force. And UN authorisation, which he believed required a new, specific mandate.
Indeed, the inquiry heard that Lord Goldsmith had written to Tony Blair just before he went to meet President Bush, telling him that he would need a further UN resolution to justify war against Iraq.
He was not asked for that advice, he said. "I don't frankly think it was terribly welcome." Why not? "I think you'll have to ask Mr Blair that." But he said it was one of the things that had made the prime minister “to his great credit” try to persuade Mr Bush to go down the UN route.
There was a lot of discussion about resolution 1441 itself and whether it left things unclear. Not for the French - they privately told the Americans there was no need for any more resolutions if they wanted to go to war.
For more Channel 4 News coverage of the Iraq inquiry
- Goldsmith grilling over Iraq war advice
- Liveblog: Lord Goldsmith at the Iraq inquiry
- Legal process 'lamentable'
- Blog: Goldsmith forever linked to Blair
- Iraq inquiry: in search of the pro-war voices
- Iraq inquiry on Twitter
Mr Goldsmith was not involved in discussions about it - and was not asked for any advice in writing. But just before it was passed by the security council, he did warn Jack Straw he should not assume it would provide sufficient authorisation.
And here is the crunch: Lord Goldsmith said that "at first" he still believed it would NOT be lawful for Britain to invade Iraq without that second UN resolution. So why did he change his mind? So far – there is the merest tantalising hint - for good reasons, he said: "I then ultimately reached, when I had to reach a definitive view on this, a different view."
We're all waiting to hear what those good reasons turn out to be.
