4.3 |
Iraq WMD assessments, October 2002 to March 2003
Biological
weapons
The
declaration reiterated information already provided to the UN,
which had already been
reviewed.
It failed to “provide a technically coherent account of Iraq’s
biological weapons
programme”.
The declaration provided new material relating to 40 sites which
Iraq claimed
had no
connection with proscribed activity but which were judged capable
of supporting
a BW
programme. It did not mention some dual-use sites previously
monitored by
UNSCOM.
Names of individuals included in previous declarations on
biological weapons
had been
“systematically removed”, although the declaration stated that they
would be
“provided
to UNMOVIC on request”.
It did
not:
•
“address the
issue of unaccounted for growth media”;
•
“provide fully
documented accounts” of the pre-1991 programmes or
“recognition
of the
military application”;
•
“acknowledge
any proscribed biological weapons activity post-1991”;
or
•
“mention …
transportable production facilities”.
Nuclear
weapons
The
declaration was “largely the same as the FFCD” for activity
pre-1991 which had been
issued in
1998, “with a new extended summary”. It was “accurate” but
“incomplete”. It
maintained
that no weapons-related work had been undertaken since 1998. It did
not
address
whether Iraq had been seeking uranium in Africa.
Ballistic
missiles
Most of the
data provided related to pre-1991 programmes. The declaration
acknowledged
“some
facilities established since 1998” and “known from intelligence”.
It also provided
“some
limited new evidence of proscribed missile development post-1991”.
Two designs
were judged
to have ranges greater than the limit of 150km.
The “major
omissions” were:
•
“no attempt to
resolve outstanding issues” relating to SCUD missiles;
•
“no mention of
any post-1998 activity at many missile related facilities,
including
the
al-Rafah engine test stand”, which was “capable of testing engines
for
missiles
with ranges over 1000km”; and
•
“no details of
recent procurement activity associated with more
advanced
missile propellant”.
Unmanned
Aerial Vehicles (UAVs):
•
The
declaration referred to “aborted attempts” to convert an anti-ship
missile into
a land
attack weapon with a range of 95km. The JIC judged the “system
would
be suitable
for chemical and biological delivery”.
•
The
declaration claimed that the L-29 aircraft was “a target-drone” and
there
“was no
mention of a chemical or biological agent delivery capability”. The
JIC
judged that
Iraq had “more aircraft” and had “conducted more flight tests
than
stated”;
and that its range was “understated”.
317