WASHINGTON – In his first public defense of pre-war intelligence, CIA Director George Tenet said yesterday that US analysts never claimed before the war that Iraq posed an imminent threat.
Tenet said analysts had varying opinions on the state of Iraq’s chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs and those differences were spelled out in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate given to the White House. That report summarized intelligence on Iraq’s weapons programs.Analysts “painted an objective assessment for our policy makers of a brutal dictator who was continuing his efforts to deceive and build programs that might constantly surprise us and threaten our interests, ” he said in a speech at Georgetown University.”No one told us what to say or how to say it,” Tenet said.He said that “in the intelligence business, you are never completely wrong or completely right … When the facts of Iraq are all in, we will neither be completely right nor completely wrong”.He also noted that the search for banned weapons is continuing and “despite some public statements, we are nowhere near 85 per cent finished”.That was a direct rebuttal to claims made by David Kay, Tenet’s former top adviser in the weapons search.Since Kay resigned two weeks ago, his statements that deposed President Saddam Hussein’s purported weapons didn’t exist at the time of the US invasion have sparked an intense debate over the prewar intelligence the Bush administration used to justify the war.The failure to find weapons of mass destruction is turning into a major political issue ahead of the presidential election, calling into question the justification for the war as US casualties mount.Republicans in Congress have increasingly been blaming poor intelligence.Democrats have said intelligence agencies deserved only part of the blame and have accused the White House of showcasing intelligence that bolstered the case for war, while ignoring dissenting opinions.President George W Bush was expected to announce another commission this week to review the intelligence community.At least five other inquiries into prewar intelligence are already under way.* Also yesterday, Britain’s government was forced on the defensive over its pre-war information on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction after Prime Minister Tony Blair admitted even he had been in the dark about a key piece of intelligence.Opposition lawmakers questioned why Blair, who claimed before the war that Iraq could unleash chemical or biological weapons within 45 minutes, had not known whether this referred to missiles or shorter-range “battlefield” weapons.On Wednesday, Blair told the House of Commons that even with British troops poised to enter Iraq in March last year to unseat Saddam Hussein, he had not been clear about this.It brought a scathing response from the leader of the main opposition Conservative Party, Michael Howard.”If I were prime minister and I had failed to ask that basic question before committing our country to war I would be seriously considering my position,” Howard said.Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon — who admitted he had known the 45-minute claim referred only to artillery shells and mortars but did not tell Blair — insisted the issue was irrelevant.”This was not a great matter of public controversy at the time,” Hoon said on BBC radio, referring to the run-up to the US-led war.”I don’t believe that there was any misleading impression”.Hoon later faced a severe grilling from a House of Commons defence committee, with lawmakers expressing incredulity at the apparent confusion at the heart of government.- Nampa-Reuters-AFPThat report summarized intelligence on Iraq’s weapons programs. Analysts “painted an objective assessment for our policy makers of a brutal dictator who was continuing his efforts to deceive and build programs that might constantly surprise us and threaten our interests, ” he said in a speech at Georgetown University. “No one told us what to say or how to say it,” Tenet said. He said that “in the intelligence business, you are never completely wrong or completely right … When the facts of Iraq are all in, we will neither be completely right nor completely wrong”. He also noted that the search for banned weapons is continuing and “despite some public statements, we are nowhere near 85 per cent finished”. That was a direct rebuttal to claims made by David Kay, Tenet’s former top adviser in the weapons search. Since Kay resigned two weeks ago, his statements that deposed President Saddam Hussein’s purported weapons didn’t exist at the time of the US invasion have sparked an intense debate over the prewar intelligence the Bush administration used to justify the war. The failure to find weapons of mass destruction is turning into a major political issue ahead of the presidential election, calling into question the justification for the war as US casualties mount. Republicans in Congress have increasingly been blaming poor intelligence. Democrats have said intelligence agencies deserved only part of the blame and have accused the White House of showcasing intelligence that bolstered the case for war, while ignoring dissenting opinions. President George W Bush was expected to announce another commission this week to review the intelligence community. At least five other inquiries into prewar intelligence are already under way. * Also yesterday, Britain’s government was forced on the defensive over its pre-war information on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction after Prime Minister Tony Blair admitted even he had been in the dark about a key piece of intelligence. Opposition lawmakers questioned why Blair, who claimed before the war that Iraq could unleash chemical or biological weapons within 45 minutes, had not known whether this referred to missiles or shorter-range “battlefield” weapons. On Wednesday, Blair told the House of Commons that even with British troops poised to enter Iraq in March last year to unseat Saddam Hussein, he had not been clear about this. It brought a scathing response from the leader of the main opposition Conservative Party, Michael Howard. “If I were prime minister and I had failed to ask that basic question before committing our country to war I would be seriously considering my position,” Howard said. Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon — who admitted he had known the 45-minute claim referred only to artillery shells and mortars but did not tell Blair — insisted the issue was irrelevant. “This was not a great matter of public controversy at the time,” Hoon said on BBC radio, referring to the run-up to the US-led war. “I don’t believe that there was any misleading impression”. Hoon later faced a severe grilling from a House of Commons defence committee, with lawmakers expressing incredulity at the apparent confusion at the heart of government. – Nampa-Reuters-AFP
Stay informed with The Namibian – your source for credible journalism. Get in-depth reporting and opinions for
only N$85 a month. Invest in journalism, invest in democracy –
Subscribe Now!