Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
452.  Finally, Mr Hoon proposed that Mr Blair might raise with Present Bush “the need for
a comprehensive public handling strategy, so that we can explain convincingly why we
need to take such drastic action against Iraq’s WMD now”.
453.  Copies of Mr Hoon’s letter were sent to Mr Straw and to Sir Richard Wilson.
MR STRAW’S ADVICE, 25 MARCH 2002
454.  Mr Straw wrote to Mr Blair on 25 March setting out the risks which could
arise from discussions with President Bush, but suggesting the “case against
Iraq and in favour (if necessary) of military action” might be made in the context
of seeking regime change as an essential part of a strategy of eliminating Iraq’s
WMD, rather than an objective in its own right.
455.  Mr Straw advised that the fact that Iraq was in flagrant breach of the
obligations imposed on it by the Security Council provided the core of a strategy
based on international law.
456.  The case could be based on a demand for the unfettered re-admission of
inspectors.
457.  The US was likely to oppose any proposal for a new mandate from the UN
Security Council, but the weight of UK legal advice was that a new mandate “may
well be required”.
458.  Mr Straw also stated that, if the argument was to be won, the whole “case
against Iraq and in favour (if necessary) of military action” needed to be narrated
with reference to the international rule of law.
459.  In his meeting on 18 March, Mr Straw asked for “detailed advice from FCO Legal
Advisers on the provisions in international law for the use of the kind of force that might
be required should the Americans set themselves the objective of regime change”.162
460.  Mr Straw concluded he would write to the Prime Minister to flag up the main
issues for Crawford, including a media strategy, and asked for a draft, submitted through
Sir Michael Jay.
461.  Mr John Grainger, FCO Legal Counsellor in the Middle East Department, advised
on 21 March that any action by HMG to assist any group to overthrow the regime
in Iraq by violent means would be contrary to international law; and that any use of
force with the objective of changing the Iraqi regime would be unlawful.163 But regime
change would not be unlawful if it was a consequence of the use of force permitted
by international law.
162  Minute Sedwill to Patey, 18 March 2002, ‘Iraq’.
163  Minute Grainger to PS [FCO], 21 March 2002, ‘Iraq: Regime Change’.
468
Previous page | Contents | Next page