45 Minutes:the Claim Was Bogus

Daily Mail (London), July 15, 2004 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

45 Minutes:the Claim Was Bogus


Byline: GORDON RAYNER

THE now infamous claim that Saddam Hussein could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes should not have been included in the September 2002 dossier, Lord Butler concluded.

The claim was 'unsubstantiated' and needed further clarification and explanation, he says. Its inclusion led to suspicions it had been used because of its ' eyecatching character'.

Based on 'vague and ambiguous' intelligence, the claim referred to 'chemical and biological munitions being with military units and ready for firing within 20 to 45 minutes'.

Government experts 'did not know what munitions the report was referring to or their status, not did they know from where and to where the munitions might be moved', Lord Butler says.

But most of the experts came to the conclusion the report was referring to battlefield weapons - for use within Iraq - rather than long-range ballistic missiles.

By the time the dossier was published, the distinction had been lost, leading Tony Blair to state that Saddam had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons deployable at 45 minutes' notice.

The Prime Minister told MPs in February this year that he had no idea the warning had referred only to short-range battlefield weapons.

The Butler Report says the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), which wrote the dossier, 'should not have included the 45-minute report in its assessment and in the Government's dossier without stating what it was believed to refer to'.

It adds: 'The fact that the reference in the classified assessment was repeated in the dossier later led to suspicions that it had been included because of its eyecatching character.' Those suspicions were fuelled by BBC reporter Andrew Gilligan's report, which claimed the dossier had been 'sexed up' on the orders of former Downing Street spin doctor Alastair Campbell to make the case for war more convincing.

His source for the story, Government scientist Dr David Kelly, was found dead on July 18 last year after his name was made public.

The Butler report adds that the Secret Intelligence Service - also known as MI6 - had now admitted that the validity of the 45-minute claim had 'come into question'.

He says 'strenuous efforts' were made to ensure that the assessment of the threat posed by Saddam did not go beyond the judgments of the JIC.

'But in translating material from JIC assessments into the dossier, warnings were lost about the limited intelligence base on which some of aspects of these assessments were being made.

'The Government would have seen these warnings in the original JIC assessments and taken them into account in reading them, but the public would not have known of them. The language in the dossier may have left readers with the impression that there was fuller and firmer intelligence behind the judgments than was the case.

'Our view, having reviewed all of the material, is that judgments in the dossier went to (although not beyond) the outer limits of the intelligence available.' However, Lord Butler makes it clear he does not believe the Prime Minister, Mr Campbell or anybody else involved in drawing up the report deliberately overplayed the claim for political reasons.

'We have found no evidence of deliberate distortion or of culpable negligence,' he says.

g.rayner@dailymail.co.uk

The devious language MISTAKES were made in the way that 'thin' intelligence was presented in the vital September 2002 dossier, Lord Butler concludes.

He says the Joint Intelligence Committee was well aware of the limitations of the information, but those misgivings were not included in the final document presented to Tony Blair.

As a result, 'more weight was placed on the intelligence than it could bear' - a conclusion proved by the fact that much of it has since been discredited.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

45 Minutes:the Claim Was Bogus
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?