![Google](http://www.google.com/images/poweredby_transparent/poweredby_FFFFFF.gif)
Iraq war was a crime of aggression: The damning verdict of top Whitehall lawyers which No.10 refused to accept
James Chapman
Devastating evidence at the Iraq inquiry yesterday revealed that every senior legal adviser at the Foreign Office believed the conflict was in breach of international law.
Astonishingly, Downing Street asked lawyers to assess what the consequences would be if Britain toppled Saddam Hussein without legal authority. When they received the lawyers' memo, No.10 demanded: 'Why has this been put in writing?'
Sir Michael Wood, then the Foreign Office's senior legal adviser, warned ministers again and again that to go to war without approval from a UN Security Council resolution would constitute a 'crime of aggression' in international law.
He told them it risked turning into a foreign policy disaster on the scale of Britain's ill-fated invasion of Suez in 1956.
Less than two months before the Iraq War began in 2003, Sir Michael told ministers there was 'no doubt' that Britain could not lawfully use force against Iraq because it could not claim it was acting in self-defence, that it was trying to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe or that it had the authorisation of the UN.
A series of secret documents released to the Chilcot inquiry revealed that the lawyer's stance led to an extraordinary stand-off with Jack Straw, then Foreign Secretary.
Mr Straw, now Labour's Justice Secretary, insisted that while at the Home Office he had often been advised policy proposals were unlawful but gone ahead anyway.
Yesterday's revelations leave Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, who is due to appear today, and Mr Blair, who will give evidence on Friday, facing massive pressure.
Newly-declassified Government documents show Lord Goldsmith was initially clear that there was no sufficient legal basis for military action.
He even expressed concern about 'Chinese whispers' being put around Westminster that he took an ' optimistic view' of the legal position, when the opposite was true.
But after being summoned for last-minute talks with Mr Blair and Mr Straw - who warned against overly 'dogmatic' legal advice - he eventually ruled the conflict was lawful.
The secret documents show that Sir Michael, who has never spoken publicly before about the advice he gave the Government, first recorded his concerns in March 2002 as the drumbeat for an invasion grew louder.
Jack Straw (L): Rebuked the Foreign Office law chief for being 'dogmatic' Lord Goldsmith (R): Yielded to pressure to change his mind about legality of war
Dick Cheney (L): Told by Straw that UK would go to war even with no resolution Tony Blair (R): PM's staff demanded to know why legal advice was in writing
In one devastating memo in August of that year, he warned the idea of 'pre-emptive' military action had 'no basis in international law' and said to flagrantly disregard it would 'do lasting damage to the UK's international reputation (cf Suez)'.
Mr Straw's office went on to make an extraordinary request - apparently at Downing Street's behest - for an 'urgent' assessment of what might happen if Britain went to war without legal authority.
Sir Michael told ministers such a step would be 'inconceivable' and would break the duty of ministers to comply with the law, risk offences under the International Criminal Court Act and could leave ministers open to prosecutions for 'misfeasance in public office'.
He told the inquiry the request for advice on the consequences of an illegal war was 'curious', adding: 'I am still not entirely sure what the purpose was. I think it was to send off to Number Ten and it did go to Number Ten who said, "Why has this been put in writing?" is my recollection.'
As late as January 2003 - less than two months before military action was launched - Sir Michael protested at Mr Straw's assertion that it would still be possible to take action, even if the Government failed to get a second resolution authorising war.
'To use force without Security Council authority would amount to a crime of aggression,' he wrote in a memo to Mr Straw.