Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
450.  Mr Cook stated that Iraq’s military strength was now less than half its size in 1991;
and, “Ironically”, it was “only because Iraq’s military forces” were “so weak that we can
even contemplate its invasion”. He questioned the threat posed by Iraq:
“Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood
sense of the term – namely a credible device capable of being delivered against
a strategic city target. It probably … has biological toxins and battlefield chemical
munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam
anthrax agents and the then British government approved chemical and munitions
factories. Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a
military capacity that has been there for twenty years, and which we helped to
create? Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam’s ambition to
complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors?”
451.  The questions about Iraq’s capabilities asked by Mr Cook in response to the
briefing he had been given by Mr Scarlett on 20 February are set out earlier in
this Section.
Mr Scarlett’s advice, 17 March 2003
452.  On 17 March, Mr Scarlett addressed the different elements of Iraq’s
capability, including Iraq’s actions since the departure of the inspectors in 1998
to pursue chemical and biological weapons programmes, and Iraq’s activities to
pursue enhanced ballistic missiles and other means to deliver them.
453.  In relation to Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons capability, Mr Scarlett
concluded that the JIC view was clear: Iraq possessed chemical and biological
weapons, the means to deliver them, and the capacity to produce them.
454.  Mr Scarlett attributed the failure to find any significant evidence of chemical
and biological weapons to Iraq’s ability to conceal its activities and deceive
the inspectors.
455.  On 17 March, in response to a request from Sir David Manning, Mr Scarlett
provided advice on “the strength of evidence showing Saddam’s possession of WMD”.168
456.  Mr Scarlett wrote:
“The starting point is our knowledge of Iraq’s past WMD programmes. This
demonstrates not only large-scale possession of these weapons, and the readiness
to use them, but also Saddam’s determination to retain WMD in the face of military
defeat in 1991 and the subsequent UN inspections. You will recall that much of his
BW programme came to light only in 1995, following Kamil’s [Saddam Hussein’s
son-in-law] defection. And as UNSCOM demonstrated in 1999, there has never been
a full and convincing account of the destruction of Iraq’s capabilities.”
168  Minute Scarlett to Manning, 17 March 2003, ‘Iraqi WMD: Evidence of Possession’.
372
Previous page | Contents | Next page