Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.3  |  Development of UK strategy and options, April to July 2002
UK in 1998 (Operation Desert Fox), because resolution 1205 (1998) did not itself contain
any explicit authority to use force.
491.  Lord Goldsmith wrote: “I believe that it is essential to show at least some
determination by the Security Council itself that there has been a sufficiently significant
violation of the cease-fire conditions.” Given the time that had elapsed and the impact of
events, he did not “consider it legally possible to rely today on resolution 1205”.
492.  Lord Goldsmith concluded:
“My view therefore is that in the absence of a fresh resolution by the Security
Council which would at least involve a new determination of a material and flagrant
breach [by Iraq of its obligations], military action would be unlawful. Even if there
were such a resolution, but one which did not explicitly authorise the use of force,
it would remain highly debatable whether it legitimised military action – but without
it the position is, in my view, clear.
“The issuing of an ultimatum to Iraq may be helpful in delivering a clear political
message to Iraq and ensuring that all possible steps have been taken to ensure Iraqi
compliance before force is used. However an ultimatum, whether issued unilaterally
or by the Security Council, would not in itself provide a separate legal base for the
use of force.”
493.  Copies of Lord Goldsmith’s minute were sent to Mr Straw and Mr Hoon.
494.  Mr Powell recorded that Mr Blair and Lord Goldsmith would “discuss further”
in September.
495.  A note for the No.10 file written by Mr Powell on 31 July recorded that the:
“PM has seen [Lord Goldsmith’s minute], as has David Manning.
“I phoned Private Offices in FCO and MOD on 30/7, at the request of the AG
[Attorney General] (and in his presence) to ask them to destroy their copies to avoid
further leaks. PM to discuss further with AG in September.”194
496.  Mr Blair told the Inquiry that Lord Goldsmith’s advice of 30 July had
convinced him that a new resolution was necessary, and that it needed to be the
right resolution.
497.  Addressing the reference in his minute to reliance on previous resolutions,
Lord Goldsmith told the Inquiry:
“… the revival argument depends on two things. It depends … on the fact that
resolution 678 authorised the use of force and that resolution 687 suspended it
on conditions, but didn’t, in fact, cancel it …
194  Note (handwritten) Powell, 31 July 2002, ‘File’.
85
Previous page | Contents | Next page