This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/8382194.stm

The article has changed 19 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 9 Version 10
Iraq war 'legitimacy' questioned Iraq war 'legitimacy' questioned
(20 minutes later)
The Iraq war was of "questionable legitimacy" even though it is unlikely to be ever proved illegal, a former senior diplomat has said.The Iraq war was of "questionable legitimacy" even though it is unlikely to be ever proved illegal, a former senior diplomat has said.
Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the UK's ambassador to the UN in 2003, said the invasion did not have the backing of most UN members or even the UK public.Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the UK's ambassador to the UN in 2003, said the invasion did not have the backing of most UN members or even the UK public.
But he said he believed the US and UK had "established" its legality in that it had never been challenged in court.But he said he believed the US and UK had "established" its legality in that it had never been challenged in court.
The inquiry is looking into the background to the 2003 invasion.The inquiry is looking into the background to the 2003 invasion.
LegalityLegality
Sir Jeremy, the UK's permanent representative to the UN between 1997 and 2003, was centre stage in UK-led efforts to negotiate a second UN resolution in early 2003, seen by many countries as necessary to directly authorise military action.Sir Jeremy, the UK's permanent representative to the UN between 1997 and 2003, was centre stage in UK-led efforts to negotiate a second UN resolution in early 2003, seen by many countries as necessary to directly authorise military action.
The move was vetoed by France and Russia, leading critics to claim the subsequent invasion was illegal.The move was vetoed by France and Russia, leading critics to claim the subsequent invasion was illegal.
If you do something internationally that the majority of UN member states think is wrong, illegitimate or politically unjustifiable, you are taking a risk in my view Sir Jeremy Greenstock
Sir Jeremy said he believed existing UN resolutions provided "sufficient legal cover" for future action but only if was on the basis of Iraq being found in breach of its obligations in relation to its weapons stockpile.Sir Jeremy said he believed existing UN resolutions provided "sufficient legal cover" for future action but only if was on the basis of Iraq being found in breach of its obligations in relation to its weapons stockpile.
Asked about the legality of the war, he said there were different opinions and that a "final and conclusive" verdict was never likely to be made.Asked about the legality of the war, he said there were different opinions and that a "final and conclusive" verdict was never likely to be made.
But he added: "If you do something internationally that the majority of UN member states think is wrong, illegitimate or politically unjustifiable, you are taking a risk in my view."But he added: "If you do something internationally that the majority of UN member states think is wrong, illegitimate or politically unjustifiable, you are taking a risk in my view."
"I regarded our participation in the military action against Iraq in March 2003 as legal but of questionable legitimacy in that it did not have the democratically observable backing of a great majority of member states or even perhaps of a majority of people inside the UK."I regarded our participation in the military action against Iraq in March 2003 as legal but of questionable legitimacy in that it did not have the democratically observable backing of a great majority of member states or even perhaps of a majority of people inside the UK.
"There was a failure to establish legitimacy although I think we successfully established legality in the UN....to the degree, at least, that we were never challenged in the UN or International Court of Justice for those actions.""There was a failure to establish legitimacy although I think we successfully established legality in the UN....to the degree, at least, that we were never challenged in the UN or International Court of Justice for those actions."
'Division''Division'
On its fourth day of public hearings, the inquiry is examining failed efforts to resolve the Iraq crisis through the United Nations.On its fourth day of public hearings, the inquiry is examining failed efforts to resolve the Iraq crisis through the United Nations.
Sir Jeremy told the inquiry that Iraq's representative at the UN had told him in September 2002 that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction but the UK government was not in a position to ascertain whether this was true.Sir Jeremy told the inquiry that Iraq's representative at the UN had told him in September 2002 that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction but the UK government was not in a position to ascertain whether this was true.
He said the "whole saga", in terms of UK policy, was driven by the belief that Iraq had WMD and any talk from the US of other motivations for war, such as regime change, were "unhelpful".He said the "whole saga", in terms of UK policy, was driven by the belief that Iraq had WMD and any talk from the US of other motivations for war, such as regime change, were "unhelpful".
He described the Iraq crisis as the source of "great division" in the recent history of the UN Security Council with the US at "one end of the spectrum" and France and Russia at the other end. He described the Iraq crisis as the source of the "greatest division" in the recent history of the UN Security Council with the US at "one end of the spectrum" and France and Russia at the other end in terms of their approach to dealing with Iraq.
The UK government believed confronting Iraq was in the national interest, he said, but felt this should be done through "collective action" and on the basis of UN resolutions.
Despite a change in mood in the US after the 9/11 attacks, Sir Jeremy said he did not believe there was any "alternative" to trying to make the existing policy of containment of Iraq work.
And he said he did not "recall" being asked to give his views to No 10 about a possible change of approach to Iraq in April 2002.
On Thursday, ex-US ambassador Sir Christopher Meyer said Tony Blair's view on regime change in Iraq "tightened" at that point after a private meeting with President Bush.
'Heavyweight figure'
During the first few weeks inquiry chairman Sir John Chilcot and his four colleagues are focusing on policy in the build-up to the 2003 invasion.
Sir Christopher Meyer, the UK's former ambassador to the US, said the rapid military build-up to the invasion in March 2003 had "short-circuited" the process of weapons inspections supported by the UN.
INQUIRY TIMELINE November-December: Former top civil servants, spy chiefs, diplomats and military commanders to give evidenceJanuary-February 2010: Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and other politicians expected to appear before the panel March 2010: Inquiry expected to adjourn ahead of the general election campaignJuly-August 2010: Inquiry expected to resumeReport set to be published in late 2010 or early 2011 Iraq inquiry: Day-by-day timeline Q&A: Iraq war inquiryINQUIRY TIMELINE November-December: Former top civil servants, spy chiefs, diplomats and military commanders to give evidenceJanuary-February 2010: Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and other politicians expected to appear before the panel March 2010: Inquiry expected to adjourn ahead of the general election campaignJuly-August 2010: Inquiry expected to resumeReport set to be published in late 2010 or early 2011 Iraq inquiry: Day-by-day timeline Q&A: Iraq war inquiry
The ex-diplomat said officials had been left "scrabbling" for evidence of WMD as US troops prepared for invasion. Through the process UK government believed confronting Iraq was in the national interest, he said, but felt this should be done through "collective action" and on the basis of UN resolutions.
He also said, as early as March 2002, the UK was urging President Bush to "go down the UN route" to build an international coalition if he proposed to oust Saddam Hussein. He said he did not "recall" being asked to give his views to No 10 about a possible change of approach to Iraq in April 2002.
On Thursday, former US ambassador Sir Christopher Meyer said Tony Blair's view on regime change in Iraq "tightened" at that point after a private meeting with President Bush.
'Heavyweight figure'
Weapons inspectors returned to Iraq in early 2003 after the UN Security Council passed resolution 1441 the previous November, the passage of which Sir Jeremy was heavily involved in.Weapons inspectors returned to Iraq in early 2003 after the UN Security Council passed resolution 1441 the previous November, the passage of which Sir Jeremy was heavily involved in.
This resolution gave Saddam Hussein a "final opportunity" to declare his full weapons stockpile and co-operate with inspectors or face serious consequences. This gave Saddam Hussein a "final opportunity" to declare his full weapons stockpile and co-operate with inspectors or face serious consequences.
The US and UK governments cited his failure to comply with this resolution as justification for the invasion.
The BBC's World Affairs Correspondent Peter Biles said Sir Jeremy was a "heavyweight" figure who would be expected to shed light on what the UK and its allies knew about Iraq's true military threat.
Sir Jeremy was also deputy of the heavily criticised Coalition Provisional Authority which ran Iraq in the months after the war.
He has since been critical about how post-war Iraq was administered and was forced to pull a memoir of the period in 2005 in the face of government opposition.
However, Sir Jeremy will be questioned about the issue at a later date in the inquiry.
Weapons focus
The inquiry has so far concentrated on UK-US relations in the run-up to war and the UK's assessment of Iraq's military threat.
A senior Foreign Office official revealed on Wednesday that it had received reports just days before the invasion that Saddam Hussein may not be able to use chemical weapons as they had been "disassembled".
WITNESSES ON FRIDAY Sir Jeremy Greenstock, UK Permanent Representative to the UN 1997-2003 Analysis: tolerant or critical? How US has investigated Iraq war Send us your commentsWITNESSES ON FRIDAY Sir Jeremy Greenstock, UK Permanent Representative to the UN 1997-2003 Analysis: tolerant or critical? How US has investigated Iraq war Send us your comments
But Sir William Ehrman told the inquiry these reports "contradicted" earlier intelligence and did not "invalidate" the fact that Iraq was believed to possess weapons of mass destruction. The US and UK governments cited his failure to subsequently comply with this resolution as justification for the invasion.
He told the inquiry that he was "surprised" that no weapons of mass destruction were ultimately ever found in Iraq. Asked about the UK's objective in seeking a second UN resolution, Sir Jeremy said it was to try and obtain "the safest possible legal grounds for use of force should that be necessary".
"We felt we had legal grounds in 1441 but these grounds were contested and made up of subjective opinions," he said.
He said the US felt it did not need a further resolution to justify military action but realised that the UK, as its main ally, would benefit from this.
Sir Jeremy was also deputy of the heavily criticised Coalition Provisional Authority which ran Iraq in the months after the war but will be questioned about the issue at a later date in the inquiry.
The inquiry has so far concentrated on UK-US relations in the run-up to war and the UK's assessment of Iraq's military threat.
The Iraq inquiry, set up by Prime Minister Gordon Brown in July, is due to report by the end of 2010.The Iraq inquiry, set up by Prime Minister Gordon Brown in July, is due to report by the end of 2010.
Mr Brown and his predecessor Tony Blair are expected to be among future witnesses along with former senior advisers and military figures.Mr Brown and his predecessor Tony Blair are expected to be among future witnesses along with former senior advisers and military figures.