Iraq Inquiry Digest

Dutch Iraq Inquiry reports

by Andrew Mason

The Dutch Iraq Inquiry has published its final report. The conclusions (in English) can be found here.

The most important key finding is that UN resolution 1441 was not a mandate for the invasion of Iraq.

The key findings with regard to the legality of the invasion are as follows:

7. At an early juncture, the Netherlands aligned itself with the US-British position, which was ultimately to lead to the invasion of Iraq. However, the Netherlands took the view that the strategy of regime change advocated by the US had no basis in international law. Dutch policy therefore continued to be directed towards neutralization of the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) that Iraq was supposed to possess, and later towards securing compliance with the Security Council resolutions. It was inevitable, however, that the US-British action would result in regime change. The Dutch government lent its political support to a war whose purpose was not consistent with Dutch government policy. It may therefore be said that the Dutch stance was to some extent disingenuous.

…

14. The decision to support the invasion of Iraq was based mainly on international political considerations. First, there were the largely unspoken Atlantic solidarity considerations. Secondly, there was a desire for continuity in Dutch policy on Iraq. Such continuity was dubious, however, since by 2003 the US and Britain were pursuing a very different objective from that which they had pursued in the 1990s. They had moved from action designed to penalize aggression to intervention that had to result in the foreign occupation of Iraq.

…

18. The Security Council resolutions on Iraq during the 1990s did not constitute a mandate for the US-British military intervention in 2003. Despite the existence of certain ambiguities, the wording of Resolution 1441 cannot reasonably be interpreted (as the government did) as authorizing individual Member Stated to use military force to compel Iraq to comply with the Security Council’s resolutions, without authorization from the Security Council.

19. The Netherlands made it clear that it attached great importance to a so-called ’second resolution’, but this position was toned down because the government consistently added that a second resolution was politically desirable, but not legally indispensable.

20. The Dutch government’s oft-repeated view that a second resolution was ‘politically desirable, but not legally indispensable’ is not easy to uphold. The wording and scope of Resolution 1441 cannot be interpreted as such a second resolution. Hence, the military action had no sound mandate under international law.

4 Responses to “Dutch Iraq Inquiry reports”

Comment from John Bone
Time January 12, 2010 at 5:40 pm

The last word in paragraph 19 should be “indispensable”, not “indefensible”. The same error occurs also in your copying of paragraph 20.

The Dutch report is, to a great extent, a statement of the obvious. One wonders to what lengths a British report will go to avoid the obvious.

Comment from andrewsimon
Time January 12, 2010 at 6:05 pm

John -

Thank you. Now corrected.