In the run up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq there were a few that questioned U.S. claims about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. It was only afterward that no WMD was discovered and official inquiries were made that the true extent of this failure was known. American intelligence agencies assumed that Baghdad had restarted its nuclear and WMD programs after U.N. inspectors left in the late 1990s and by the 2000s were looking for reports to confirm their suspicions rather than basing their opinions off of what they collected.
In April 2001, the CIA claimed
Iraq restarted its nuclear program when it discovered Baghdad was attempting to
buy aluminum tubes. A single analyst at the Agency came up with a theory that
the tubes were for centrifuges to enrich uranium to build a nuclear device. His
ideas rejected any counter evidence such as the tubes being a step backwards
for Iraq’s nuclear program, and that they not only did not match any
centrifuges Iraq ever tried, but any that had ever been successfully used by
anyone before. The Energy and State Departments, leading scientists at the
Livermore Labs, and the International Atomic Energy Agency all argued that the
tubes were unsuitable and matched specifications for Iraqi rocket tubes. Because
the CIA was the pre-eminent intelligence service in the U.S. its opinion won
the debate, and became the agreed upon view of the U.S. intelligence community
and would be used in speeches by the president and administration officials. In
the end, the tubes were in fact for rockets not nukes.
The CIA believed
it had supporting evidence of a renewed nuclear program, but it was just as
specious as the aluminum tubes. The CIA claimed the Iraqi Atomic Energy
Commission was back at work, and that Iraq was trying to buy dual use equipment.
This consisted of intelligence reports on things like new buildings being
built, attempts to buy magnets which Iraq never received, and Saddam praising
all kinds of government agencies including the atomic commission. One even said
most of Iraq’s nuclear scientists had retired, died or left. None of these
reports were directly related to a weapons program, and some even contradicted
that theory. For the Agency however, any activity having to do with nuclear
power was suspicious and proved that Baghdad must be working on building a bomb
again.
Another story that was not considered that important by the
Agency, but was by the Energy Department was that Iraq tried to buy yellowcake
uranium from Niger.
The CIA never took the time to check the account, and when it got the documents
it was based upon didn’t translate or analyze them for weeks. The reports made
the Energy Department believe that Iraq’s nuclear program had been revived. The
Niger claim however was created by an Italian intelligence peddler that forged
the documents and passed it along to Italian intelligence, who then gave it to
the Americans. If the U.S. had tried confirming the story from the beginning or
just taken the time to look at the fake documents when they received them this
could have been avoided, but it was not considered necessary at the time.
In 2002, U.S. imagery intelligence claimed
it found proof that Iraq had an operational chemical weapons program based upon
photographs of suspicious trucks. The Americans believed they saw a
decontamination vehicle and cargo trucks moving WMD from an ammunition dump in
Babil province. U.N. inspectors went to the site in the 1990s, but found
nothing, but that made it interesting to the U.S. There were also pictures of
the ground being graded in Babil, which intelligence took to be clearing the
soil of chemical spills. The Americans already believed that Iraq had never
destroyed all of its stocks of chemical weapons and went back to work on them
after the inspectors left. Together this became proof that Iraq had a large
stockpile of WMD, and that it was moving them from the ammo dump in Babil. After
the invasion, the Babil site was found not to contain chemical weapons, the
decontamination vehicle was just a water truck, and grading the ground was
standard procedure at an ammunition dump.
American agencies believed that Iraq had switched to mobile labs
to produce biological weapons in the late-1990s, so when it heard about an Iraq
defector
who said he worked on that program it seemed to confirm their view. Rafid Ahmed
Alwan al-Janabi aka CURVEBALL went to Germany in 1999 seeking asylum from
Saddam’s regime. He claimed to be an engineer that worked on the mobile labs, and
saw hidden WMD sites. The U.S. found the building he said he worked at, which
was taken as confirmation even though there was no evidence it was involved in
any weapons program. There were several defectors and human intelligence
reports that also talked about mobile labs, but they all had problems. An
American only met CURVEBALL once and came away with questions about his
reliability. The CIA’s European chief was told by the Germans that Janabi might
be unstable. The U.S. was more interested in confirming its assumptions
however, and ignored these issues.
These were the main stories that provided the basis for the
Bush administration’s argument that Iraq was a nuclear and WMD threat. As the
presidential Robb Silberman Commission found the U.S. had poor
intelligence collection, made faulty assessments, didn’t vet sources, and did
not to tell the administration about its problems. The American agencies failed
at every stage in its reporting on Iraq. Whatever came their way that fit their
assumption about Iraq’s weapons programs was accepted, and was passed onto the
White House, which then made them public in its case for war.
SOURCES
Robb, Charles Silberman, Laurence, “Commission on the
Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass
Destruction,” 3/31/05
Select Committee On Intelligence United States Senate,
“Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On
Iraq,” 7/7/04
1 comment:
An outstanding share! I've just forwarded this onto a coworker who was conducting a little research on this.
And he actually ordered me breakfast because I stumbled upon it
for him... lol. So let me reword this.... Thank YOU for the meal!!
But yeah, thanks for spending some time to
talk about this subject here on your web site.
Post a Comment