Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
258.  Sir David Manning submitted the letter to Mr Blair, commenting: “To be aware that
Jeremy G[reenstock] is in debate with the AG.”97
259.  A copy of Sir Jeremy’s letter was sent only to Lord Goldsmith’s office.
260.  In a minute to Lord Goldsmith on 24 January, Ms Adams addressed the points
made by Sir Jeremy on the textual arguments; the history of the negotiations; the
precedent provided by resolution 1205 (1998); and references that had been made by
Sir Jeremy to a paper submitted by Professor Christopher Greenwood Q.C., Professor
of International Law, LSE, to the Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) in October 2002.98
261.  Ms Adams concluded:
“Overall, although I don’t believe that the arguments can all be taken without
challenge, I certainly think they strengthen the case for the second view and make
the balance of view as to which is the better of the two alternative interpretations
rather closer.”
262.  Ms Adams suggested that Lord Goldsmith “might want to consider” whether he
“would like to put these arguments to Michael Wood”. Although that would “probably
mean disclosing to him your provisional view of the resolution and perhaps even the
draft advice”.
263.  Ms Adams commented to Lord Goldsmith that Sir Jeremy’s letter to Sir David
Manning “helpfully sets out his view of the arguments, although I don’t think there are
any points which are not covered in my minute of 24 January”.99
264.  Lord Goldsmith’s undated minute to Ms Adams, inviting her to draft a note setting
out his views, suggested that he did not share Sir Jeremy’s view that the wording of OP4
was the “central issue”.100
265.  Lord Goldsmith wrote that Sir Jeremy’s main argument had been that there was
“no need to focus on the words ‘for assessment’ in OP4 because there is a trigger in
OP1 suspended by OP2 but which suspension will be lifted if Iraq ‘fails to take the final
opportunity’”.
266.  Lord Goldsmith wrote that he did “not consider that this argument can in fact work
to create a form of automaticity if the final opportunity is not taken”. He focused on
the fact that OPs 4 and 11 both led to OP12 and the need for the Security Council to
meet “to consider the situation … and the need for full compliance with all the relevant
97 Manuscript comment Manning to PM, 25 January 2003, on Letter Greenstock to Manning, 24 January
2003, [untitled].
98 Minute Adams to Attorney General, 24 January 2003, ‘Iraq: Resolution 1441: Sir Jeremy Greenstock’s
points’.
99 Manuscript comment Adams to AG, 27 January 2003, on Letter Greenstock to Manning, 24 January
2003, [untitled].
100 Minute Attorney General to Adams, [24 January 2003], [untitled].
52
Previous page | Contents | Next page