Blair's 10-day rush to war with Iraq haunts him still (NZ Herald)

[struggle4progress]

<snip> March 7 was a fateful day. It was then that Hans Blix told the UN that Iraq had taken significant steps to disarm. There were still unanswered questions, he said, but more time was needed to complete his task - "not years, nor weeks, but months".

The same day Mohamed El Baradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Authority, said there was no evidence that Saddam had any nuclear weapons nor that he had been trying to acquire them. <snip>

Now that that document has been leaked, we know that Lord Goldsmith, in addition to setting out the six arguments why the war might be considered illegal, gave no definitive opinion on the legality of an attack. Rather he said "the safest legal course would be to secure the adoption of a further resolution to authorise the use of force." If no such United Nations resolution came then a "reasonable case can be made" for war relying on the authority of resolution 678. But to do that "we would need to demonstrate hard evidence of non-compliance and non-co-operation". <snip>

This March 7 document was never shown to a full cabinet meeting. Mr Blair later suggested he could not trust some members of his cabinet with such papers. <snip>

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=2&ObjectID=10123160