Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
429.  Mr Brenton subsequently reported on 6 March that the US “had also gained
the impression that we need the resolution for legal reasons: I explained the real
situation”.169
430.  Asked by the Inquiry what he had understood “the real situation” to be,
Mr Brenton said that Lord Goldsmith had not told him anything, but he had sat in on
Lord Goldsmith’s conversations with the US Attorney General and “got the impression
from him [Lord Goldsmith] that there was a legal case for our involvement, even if we
didn’t get the second resolution”.170
431.  Ms Adams produced a revised draft for Lord Goldsmith on 12 February, which for
the first time concluded:
“… having regard to the arguments of our co-sponsors which I heard in Washington,
I am prepared to accept that a reasonable case can be made that resolution 1441
revives the authorisation to use force in resolution 678.”171
Agreement on a second resolution
432.  Following discussion between Mr Blair and President Bush on 19 February,
the UK agreed a “light draft resolution” with the US.
433.  Lord Goldsmith subsequently advised that draft would be “sufficient”
to authorise the use of force if it was all that would be negotiable.
434.  Lord Goldsmith did not, however, accept the underpinning legal analysis
offered by Sir Jeremy Greenstock.
435.  Reflecting the seriousness of his concerns about the implications of recent
developments, Mr Blair sent President Bush a Note on 19 February about the need for a
second resolution (see Section 3.7).
436.  Mr Blair proposed focusing on the absence of full co-operation and a
“simple” resolution stating that Iraq had failed to take the final opportunity,
with a side statement defining tough tests of co-operation and a vote on 14 March
to provide a deadline for action.
437.  Sir Jeremy gave Ambassador John Negroponte, US Permanent Representative
to the UN, a revised “light draft resolution” on 19 February which:
noted [draft preambular paragraph (PP) 5] that Iraq had “submitted a declaration
… containing false statements and omissions and has failed to comply with and
co‑operate fully in the implementation of that resolution [1441]”; and
169 Telegram 294 Washington to FCO London, 6 March 2003, ‘Iraq: UN Endgame’.
170 Private hearing, 17 January 2011, pages 25-26.
171 Note [draft] Adams, 12 February 2003, ‘Iraq: Interpretation of 1441’.
78
Previous page | Contents | Next page