Previous page | Contents | Next page
4.1  |  Iraq WMD assessments, pre-July 2002
422.  AM French commented that the views Mr Webb had heard in the Pentagon were
“not held unanimously in Washington”, and the DIS analysis was supported by their
“US counterparts”:
“If you take a ‘best case’ scientific and technical approach to this issue, rather than
using intelligence, then we judge that Iraq could probably complete its former simple
warhead design for air delivery within about a year.”183
423.  On 22 March, Mr Webb asked Dr Paul Roper, Director Strategic Technology, for:
“… a second opinion, in particular on how quickly and under what circumstances
Iraq might acquire a deployable nuclear capability. There is a range of opinions on
this, even within the US Administration.”184
424.  Mr Webb asked for a response by 8 April.
425.  Dr Roper responded that he agreed with the advice in the DIS paper, which was “a
‘best guess’ broad based scientific judgement” in circumstances where hard intelligence
was “a little thin on the ground”. He added that it was “very important to distinguish”
between those two cases.185
426.  Dr Roper wrote that it was:
“… hard to believe that Iraq had covertly established a domestic source [of fissile
material] given the relatively large signatures of the necessary facilities and it would
almost certainly take a few years from start up to acquire enough material.”
427.  Dr Roper’s view was that the likelihood of Iraq acquiring fissile material from
abroad was “low”, but that was “purely an intelligence matter” not a scientific judgement.
428.  Dr Roper set out other components that would be required for a nuclear weapon
or device, concluding that even if “against all the odds” Iraq acquired those components
from a third party: “The nuclear component would have to be fabricated and integrated
with the explosives system and the firing electronics and incorporated in a bomb case.”
That would “take some time and the one year ‘guesstimate’ is reasonable”.
429.  Dr Roper pointed out that work could be carried out in advance of the acquisition
of fissile material. In that case “it might take only a few weeks to complete assembly”
once fissile material was obtained. Whether such activity would be detected was an
“intelligence judgement”.
183  Minute CDI to Policy Director, 21 March 2002, ‘Iraq – Nuclear Weapons’.
184  Minute PS/Policy Director to D Strat Tech, 22 March 2002, ‘Iraq – Nuclear Weapons’.
185  Minute Roper to Policy Director, 27 March 2002, ‘Iraq – Nuclear Weapons’.
91
Previous page | Contents | Next page