Global Policy Forum

By Ian Davis

The question must be asked of Colin Powell's presentation today: why the wait to present this evidence, and why the dramatic effect?

US intelligence sharing with the UN is not new. US satellite and communications intelligence has been revealed to the UN on numerous cases in the past when convenient (most recently in the Balkans, Zaire and Kosovan conflicts). With care, intelligence can be shared without compromise. The timing seems more to do with political effect than with intelligence concerns.

Nonetheless, Secretary Powell's powerful and authoritative presentation of the evidence against Iraq (much of it not new) was welcome. The evidence confirmed what most informed analysts have been saying: that Saddam's declaration to the UN is a sham, and that he is likely to be continuing to hide some limited chemical and biological weapon capabilities (but apparently not nuclear weapons, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency).

The evidence from Powell (when added to the Blix report) makes a strong case for declaring Iraq to be in "material breach" of its commitments under resolution 1441. But we should not rush to judgment - the stakes are too high. The reference to Saddam's alleged attempts to develop the smallpox virus, for example, was a new and dangerous element introduced by Powell. Assessment of this claim and the rest of the evidence by independent experts will be necessary in the coming days and weeks. Cool heads must prevail.

Baghdad is certainly obliged to provide full details about past and current nuclear, biological and chemical weapons capabilities, and if these have been destroyed, by whom, when, how and where?

However, most informed analysts believe that Iraq's nuclear, biological and chemical weapons capabilities remain underdeveloped, and present a very limited threat beyond the borders of Iraq. And the central question remains: would Iraq's disarmament be best achieved via a war "within weeks" as Bush wants or a continuation of the inspections process?

Inspections are going remarkably well. They should go even better with access to US intelligence. Inspections are more sophisticated, and receiving more cooperation from the Iraqis, than previous Unscom inspections, and Unscom destroyed more chemical and biological weapons facilities than the Gulf war. No evidence that Colin Powell has presented today suggests we need to rush headlong into war.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.