Former AG’s opinion on invasion changed by officials

FORMER attorney general Peter Goldsmith, who approved the 2003 invasion of Iraq, had doubted the legal basis for the conflict but changed his mind after talks with officials in London and Washington.

Giving evidence yesterday to the public inquiry into the conflict, Goldsmith defended the advice he gave Tony Blair’s government — despite the opinion of two former colleagues that the war was illegal.

He said he had initially questioned the basis for military action, saying the UN position was “not crystal clear”, and in January 2003 — two months before the invasion — had alerted the government to his doubts.

However, a month later, following “inquiries and researches” in London and Washington, he came round to the opinion that using force against Iraq would be legal under UN Security Council resolution 1441, passed in November 2002.

“I was of the view that there was a reasonable case that a second resolution was not necessary and that was, on past precedent, sufficient to constitute a green light,” he told the Chilcot inquiry in London.

Goldsmith gave his evidence ahead of Blair’s eagerly awaited appearance before the inquiry tomorrow. The issue of the conflict’s legality is likely to form a key part of the former prime minister’s questioning.

There has been persistent speculation over whether Goldsmith was right and whether he was pressured into giving his approval, which was necessary for Blair to take Britain to war alongside then US president George W Bush.

Resolution 1441 gave Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein a final chance to give up weapons of mass destruction but disagreement has raged over whether this authorised military action in the event he did not cooperate.

Goldsmith acknowledged a “plausible” case could be made for suggesting another resolution was needed in which the UN Security Council declared Saddam in breach of its resolutions.

His legal opinion differs sharply from that of the two senior legal advisors in the foreign ministry at the time, who told the inquiry that without a second resolution, the war was illegal.

Goldsmith said that in the year before the invasion, he believed there would have been little legal justification for war and had challenged ministers who appeared to suggest they could invade Iraq as “self-defence”.

“I didn’t see any evidence of an imminent threat” to Britain that would justify this, Goldsmith said.

He wrote to then defence secretary Geoff Hoon in March 2002 to complain about public comments Hoon made suggesting there was. During a meeting with Blair in July 2002, Goldsmith said he had also stressed that a new UN resolution would be necessary to authorise military action, adding: “I don’t think that was welcome.”

However, he noted that Blair went on to convince Bush to try for UN approval for action against Saddam, which culminated in resolution 1441.