The Iraq War exposed critical flaws in Australia's decision-making processes, cabinet historian David Lee says, with greater transparency and accountability needed when deciding whether to go to war.
Newly released, previously secret 2004 cabinet papers offer a detailed look at Australia's involvement in the US-led invasion of Iraq.
The documents reveal limited internal debate, reliance on discredited intelligence and efforts to safeguard economic interests, including the Australian wheat trade.
The Howard government's motivations to send troops to Iraq was "less weapons of mass destruction than it was that the US had requested help", Mr Lee told AAP.
"And the Howard government wanted to strengthen relations with the US government."
Former prime minister John Howard recently defended his government's decision, acknowledging the intelligence failures that convinced Australia to participate.
"I still tenaciously maintain the decision (was) taken in good faith based on national intelligence assessment ... which recorded a very strong belief that they had the stockpile" he said, describing the failure as a "blow".
The invasion of Iraq led to the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime, but did not find stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.
The cabinet papers reveal key decisions were made without a formal departmental submission outlining the implications of joining the war.
Instead, discussions were dominated by oral reports and informal deliberations within the National Security Committee.
"There was discussion, there was an oral report by the prime minister, then there was a Cabinet minute that came out of that," Mr Lee said.
"But I suppose had there been a departmental submission, maybe the decision would have been different.
"Maybe you would have had more dissenters coming out, questioning the decision.
"Arguably, that would be a good thing if you have more contestability around decisions of war and peace."
While the cabinet papers were a significant resource, Mr Lee said they did not represent a complete historical record.
"They go a long way in explaining the government's thinking ... however, that's not the full story because there are departmental records and intelligence records that are yet to be examined," he said.
The cabinet papers also highlighted economic priorities included in decision-making.
"One of the major economic interests Australia had was its wheat trade with Iraq, because in the lead-up to the Iraq war, the Australian Wheat Board Limited had really been very successful in getting a large share of the market," Mr Lee said.
It was later revealed the wheat board engaged in bribery to get its share of the market, becoming an embarrassment for the government.
Mr Lee said reforms such as mandatory parliamentary votes could enhance transparency, along with parliamentary debates before military interventions, and in any case, further scrutiny might be warranted.
"Some people would say, yes, there's still an argument for having such an inquiry," he said, referencing calls for a royal commission similar to the UK's Chilcot inquiry into the decision to commit British troops to the US-led invasion of Iraq.
"The transparency and accountability mechanisms we put in place now could prevent similar issues in the future."
