In view of your meeting with President Bush on Friday, I thought you might wish to know where I stand on the question of whether a further decision of the [UN] security council is legally required in order to authorise the use of force against Iraq. I remain of the view that the correct legal interpretation of resolution 1441 is that it does not authorise the use of force without a further determination by the security council. My view remains that a further [UN] decision is required.

The Iraq Inquiry, led by Sir John Chilcot, was created by former prime minister Gordon Brown [official profile] in 2009 to identify lessons that can be learned [JURIST report] from the Iraq invasion. In January, the inquiry released a 2002 letter [JURIST report] from Goldsmith to former secretary of defense Geoff Hoon [BBC profile] in which Goldsmith warned the Cabinet that the Iraq invasion was not supported by international law. Former chief legal adviser to the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) [official website] Sir Michael Wood [UN profile, PDF] told the Iraq Inquiry in January that he had advised the Foreign Ministry that the invasion was illegal [JURIST report]. During a public hearing in February, former UK international development secretary Clare Short told the inquiry Blair was "misleading" and "deceitful" [JURIST report] with the Cabinet and parliament regarding the Iraq invasion. Additionally in February, former UK Foreign Ministry secretary Jack Straw [Guardian profile] testified [JURIST report] that he did not ignore legal advice that the invasion of Iraq lacked basis in international law. Brown also testified before the inquiry [JURIST report] in March stating that he remains convinced that the decision to participate in the 2003 Iraq invasion was the appropriate course of action.