More on the Kay Report; Powell, Saddam and the 15-year gap

In an article on Colin Powell's visit to Baghdad, CBS News notes the lack of progress in finding any solid evidence that Iraq had any WMD at the time the war was started and counters the Washington Times/Sunday Time of London articles that claim that David Kay's report on the WMD search may be delayed.

Powell's visit comes amid continuing doubts over the validity of the case for war, and the way intelligence was used to justify it.

The administration has reported finding no illegal weapons so far. The CIA says two trailers discovered in northern Iraq may have been biological weapons factories, but State Department analysts disagree. The White House has withdrawn the claim that Iraq sought uranium in Niger.

An interim report on the search for Iraqi weapons is due soon, but there are indications the reports findings might be inconclusive.

In July, David Kay, the survey group's leader, suggested that he had seen enough evidence to convince himself that Saddam Hussein had had a program to produce weapons of mass destruction. He expected to find "strong" evidence of missile delivery systems and "probably" evidence of biological weapons.

But last week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he had met with Kay, and that the onetime weapons inspector had not informed him of any finds.

The Times of London reported this weekend that the report had been postponed because of lack of evidence. But CBS News has learned there is no delay.

The article also notes that former UN weapons inspectors are saying that the "unaccounted" for weapons that apparently were part the large quantities Bush claimed in his State of the Union Address that Saddam still had may have been paperwork "glitches". I haven't been able to find the article I originally read making a similar suggestion, the gist of which was that Saddam had probably destroyed many of the weapons he did have at one point, but failed to create the proper paperwork. As a result, inspectors wouldn't be able to find those weapons, since they no longer existed, but neither could they consider them "destroyed" since they had no real proof of that. Whether this is the case or not, obviously, I can't say, but it is one of the possible explainations for our inability to find all the gallons and tons of weapons materials that Bush claimed Saddam had.

The other point the article brings out is that Powell is now claiming that Saddam's gassing of the Kurds in 1988 is sufficient justification for the war in 2003.

"If you want evidence of the existence and the use of weapons of mass destruction, come here now to Halabja today and see it," Powell said after visiting the museum. "What happened over the intervening 15 years? Did (Saddam) suddenly lose the motivation? Did he suddenly decide that such weapons would not be useful? The international community did not believe so."

Amazingly, Powell seems to have forgotten that between 1988 and 2003, America fought a war in Iraq (1991, under Bush the First and largely led by Powell himself), and made bombing runs during Clinton's regime. In addition, Saddam faced sanctions from the UN and periodic arms inspections. In other words, a lot happened during those 15 years.

Posted by thorswitch at September 16, 2003 04:16 PM | TrackBack