Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
[…] reports on orders for illegal imports of missile related components and missile
related components and materials […] Because of the need for raw materials and
components from abroad, sanctions remain an obstacle to the development of all
Iraq’s WMD programmes.”
74.  Under a heading “Implications”, the JIC observed:
“This Assessment underlines the importance of pursuing vigorously work on the
proposed UN controlled goods list, which would help sustain effective controls on
Iraqi WMD development.”
75.  The Butler Report commented that the Assessment “signalled a clear change in the
JIC’s perception”.31
76.  The Butler Report considered that the JIC judgements on Iraq’s ballistic missile
programmes were “well-founded and properly expressed”.32
77.  Mr Miller told the Inquiry that the intelligence on the ballistic missile programme
was “fuller, and in retrospect, proved to be more reliable”.33 There was reliable reporting
on missile production at one site. Separate reporting about the retention of Al Hussein
missiles came from a source that was “characterised as regular and reliable”.
78.  Mr Miller added that the report on the retention of the Al Hussein missiles was from
“a year or two previously”, and that there was “a rather longer standing view that their
disposal hadn’t been properly accounted for”.34
79.  In relation to the judgement that Iraq was “conducting nuclear related research
and development into the enrichment of uranium and could have longer term plans to
produce enriched uranium for a weapon”, the Butler Report stated it:
“… was based on two human intelligence reports, both from new sources and
neither speaking from direct, current experience. Unusually in the nuclear field, we
conclude that those reports were given more weight in the JIC Assessment than
they could reasonably bear.”35
80.  Mr Miller told the Inquiry that there was “limited” new intelligence underpinning the
Assessment on the nuclear programme. There was an SIS report that scientists had
31  Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction [“The Butler Report”], 14 July 2004, HC 898,
paragraph 221.
32  Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction [“The Butler Report”], 14 July 2004, HC 898,
paragraph 254.
33  Private hearing, 5 May 2010, page 6.
34  Private hearing, 5 May 2010, page 7.
35  Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction [“The Butler Report”], 14 July 2004, HC 898,
paragraph 225.
28
Previous page | Contents | Next page