Bush Administration Defends Iraq War Following Kay Criticisms

The Bush administration yesterday continued to defend the U.S. invasion of Iraq, despite recent criticism by former chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq David Kay of prewar assessments of Iraq’s WMD programs, according to reports (see GSN, Jan. 26).

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said yesterday that the Bush administration would reserve judgment on U.S. prewar intelligence on Iraq until the Iraq Survey Group completed its search for evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

“It is important to compare the intelligence before the war with what we learn on the ground through the Iraq Survey Group,” McClellan. “The first step is to let the Iraqi Survey Group finish their work so the intelligence community can have as complete a picture as possible,” he added (U.S. State Department release, Jan. 26).

When asked if the Bush administration still believed that WMD stockpiles would be discovered, McClellan said, “I think it was the judgment of intelligence agencies around the world, as well as the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq, that there were large, unaccounted-for stockpiles.”

Whatever the Iraq Survey Group’s conclusions, McClellan said, the U.S. invasion of Iraq was justified because of the intent of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to develop weapons of mass destruction.

We know he had the intention, we know he had the capability,” McClellan said. “And, given his history and given the events of Sept. 11, we could not afford to rely on the good intentions of Saddam Hussein,” he said (James Risen, New York Times, Jan. 27).

Vice President Dick Cheney refused for a second day in a row yesterday to answer questions by reporters about U.S. prewar intelligence, according to the Washington Post (Mike Allen, Washington Post, Jan. 27).

Attorney General John Ashcroft, though, also defended the invasion of Iraq yesterday based on the “continued” threat posed by Hussein.

“Weapons of mass destruction, including evil chemistry and evil biology, are all matters of great concern, not only to the United States but also to the world community. They were the subject of U.N. resolutions,” Ashcroft said. “I believe there is a very clear understanding that Saddam Hussein continued to pose a threat,” he said (William Kole, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, Jan. 27).

Aides to President George W. Bush have indicated that the White House is preparing to acknowledge it was mistaken about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction if none are found within the next few months, the Washington Post reported. Other Bush administration officials said, though, that they would not make such a decision until Charles Duelfer, Kay’s replacement, submits his final report (Allen, Washington Post).

In the U.S. Congress, Democratic lawmakers have begun using Kay’s criticisms of the U.S. intelligence community to call for a more aggressive inquiry into the handling of prewar intelligence on Iraq, according to the New York Times. Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said that Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) was trying to limit the scope of his panel’s inquiry.

“Unfortunately, it appears neither the administration nor the chairman of the Senate intelligence committee shares this view” of the need for a vigorous investigation, Daschle said.

According to the Times, the Senate intelligence committee has prepared a report critical of the CIA’s handling of prewar intelligence, and is waiting for testimony from CIA Director George Tenet before completing its inquiry. Tenet is scheduled to testify before the committee March 4, a congressional official said (Risen, New York Times).

A senior U.S. intelligence official said yesterday that Kay’s criticisms were for the most part correct.

“With the caveat that the search for weapons is still going on and that it’s not over yet, it would be kind of hard to argue with the substance of what David Kay is saying,” the intelligence official said.

Even so, there is anger within the U.S. intelligence community about Kay’s decision to make his criticisms public, the intelligence official said. The official said that there is suspicion that Kay’s criticisms were intended to deflect blame from the White House.

“There is the view that Kay did seem to be leaning over backwards not to make trouble for the administration. I am not sure what his unstated agenda is. He is basically apolitical, and I respect him, but I don’t know what’s going through his mind,” the intelligence official said (Financial Times, Jan. 26).

Meanwhile, an Iraqi exile group that has claimed to be the source for a claim made in a British dossier on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that Iraq could deploy biological and chemical weapons within 45 minutes has said the claim might have been wrong, according to Agence France Presse (see GSN, Dec. 8).

The disputed “45-minute” claim was taken from raw information provided by only one source, and was part of a large amount of information provided to British intelligence, said Nick Theros, a U.S.-based representative of the Iraqi National Accord.

“We were passing it on in good faith. It was for intelligence services to verify it,” he said (Agence France-Presse/Khaleej Times, Jan. 27).

Back to top
About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines © Copyright 2008 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.