Previous page | Contents | Next page
4.2  |  Iraq WMD assessments, July to September 2002
“Experienced readers would have seen these warnings in the original JIC
Assessments and taken them into account … But the public … would not have
known … The dossier did include a first chapter on the role of intelligence, as
an introduction for the lay reader. But rather than illuminating the limitations of
intelligence … the language of this Chapter may have had the opposite effect …
Readers may, for example have read language in the dossier as implying that there
was fuller and firmer intelligence behind the judgements than was the case: our
view, having reviewed all the material, is that judgements in the dossier went to
(although not beyond) the outer limits of the intelligence available.”353
664.  The Butler Report also stated that the dossier:
“… did not refer explicitly to the JIC’s uncertainty about the size of stocks of sarin
and VX precursors, and hence Iraq’s ability to produce these agents. Nor did it, like
the JIC Assessments, refer explicitly to the lack of intelligence on the location of
facilities for producing biological and chemical agent, although it did draw attention
to the difficulty of assessing the use made of ‘dual-use’ facilities.”354
665.  The Butler Report concluded that: “Partly because of inherent difficulties”,
including the complications created by dual-use programmes, the JIC assessments of
Iraq’s chemical and biological programmes were “less assured” than the assessments
of Iraq’s nuclear capabilities, and that they:
“… tended to be over cautious and in some areas worst case. Where there was
a balance of inference to be drawn, it tended to go in the direction of inferring the
existence of banned weapons programmes. Assessments were as a consequence
less complete, especially in their considerations of alternative hypotheses, and used
a different burden of proof.”355
666.  The Butler Report stated:
The intelligence community will have had in mind that Iraq had not only
owned but used its chemical weapons in the past. It will inevitably have been
influenced by the way in which the Iraqi regime was engaged in a sustained
programme to try to deceive United Nations inspectors and to conceal from
them evidence of its prohibited programmes. Furthermore, because SIS did not have
agents with first-hand knowledge of Iraq’s nuclear, chemical, biological or ballistic
missile programmes, most of the intelligence reports on which assessments
were being made were inferential. The Assessments Staff and JIC were
353  Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction [“The Butler Report”], 14 July 2004, HC 898,
paragraphs 330-331.
354  Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction [“The Butler Report”], 14 July 2004, HC 898,
paragraph 337.
355  Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction [“The Butler Report”], 14 July 2004, HC 898,
paragraph 454.
241
Previous page | Contents | Next page