What evidence does the UK Government have that Iraq possesses WMD or of a link between Iraq and al-Qa'ida?
The Butler Review on Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction
After calls for an independent inquiry into why the UK was taken to war with Iraq, in February 2004 the Government set up an inquiry (review committee) but it was far from adequate: http://www.butlerreview.org.uk/
I supported those calling for a wider remit with as many hearings as possible in public (given the openness of the process of the Hutton inquiry, the model being used for the Butler Review of the Franks inquiry into the Falklands War, set up by Thatcher, is unacceptable). I also support the view that the review committee should include a government member who was sceptical about the claim that the Saddam Hussein regime's "WMD" represented a "clear and present" threat.
Prior to the announcement of the Review, I signed a Parliamentary Motion calling for an independent inquiry and on the appointment of the Review committee, another motion, expressing my concern about the appointment of Lord Butler to head the Government's inquiry (I have reproduced the text of the motions below).
EDM 502
INQUIRY INTO WAR WITH IRAQ 27.01.04
That this House believes that there should now be convened an independent inquiry into why the UK was taken to war with Iraq.
EDM 540
CONDUCT OF LORD BUTLER OF BROCKWELL 03.02.04
That this House notes that Lord Butler, as Cabinet Secretary, told the Scott Inquiry when asked about the less than full information being provided in parliamentary answers, 'You have to be selective about the facts'; and commented to the Scott Inquiry, on parliamentary answers, 'It was an accurate but incomplete answer. The purpose of it was to give an answer which itself was true. It did not give the full picture. It was half an answer'; and believes that this attitude shown by Lord Butler towards the importance of the provision of proper accurate information to Parliament undermines his credibility as a fair and impartial chairman for the Weapons of Mass Destruction Intelligence Inquiry.
I am continuing to ask questions about the intelligence that we were given in the run up to the war and will continue to do so until I get satisfactory answers. For details of how to look up my Parliamentary Questions and the Ministers’ answers click here.
For info on my submission to the Butler Review, on the 'uranium from Africa claim' click here.
Below I have detailed some of the questions I raised in 2003 about the evidence the UK Government used to try and justify the war.
15 August 2003
I have today written to Tony Blair to request his reply to my letter of 16 July about the UK Government's failure to hand over the evidence upon which it based its claim that Iraq sought to procure significant quantities of uranium from Niger. In my letter I pointed out that a Parliamentary answer from Bill Rammell MP stating that the reason the UK didn’t give its Niger intelligence to the weapons inspectors is because it came from another country, directly contracts a statement made by Alastair Campbell when he turned up out of the blue on 27 June for a live interview on Channel Four News as the government's row with the BBC over its Iraq coverage intensified. Campbell stated that it was the fake intelligence that was from another country but that:
“the British intelligence put what they put in that dossier on the basis of British intelligence. Get your facts right before you make serious allegations against a government.”
In view of his comment about factual accuracy, Lynne Jones has written to Tony Blair to ask which is the correct position; that stated by Mr Rammell or by Mr Campbell.
Press release: Campbell's Niger Contradiction
Tony Blair MP
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London
SW1A 2AA
Our ref: MIN/D0045w/ID
Date: 15 August 2003
Dear Tony,
UK Government breach of Article 10 Security Council Resolution (SCR) 1441
I wrote to you on 16 July (copy of my letter enclosed for ease of reference) regarding the above and received an acknowledgement from Lisa Wand dated 21 July, however, I have yet to receive your reply.
Since my letter to you, I have received the following parliamentary answer from Bill Rammell in response to a question to him about our obligations under Resolution 1441:
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his Answer of 3rd July, Official Report, column 456W, on Iraq, if he will make a statement on the UK Government's obligations under Article 10 of Security Council Resolution 1441 to pass to the International Atomic Energy Agency the information upon which it bases its assessment that Saddam Hussein's regime attempted to obtain uranium from Africa.
Date answered, 21 July; Mr Rammell:
The UK has encouraged all states that have relevant information to pass it on to the UN weapons inspection teams. The information upon which the assessment was made that Saddam Hussein's regime had attempted to procure uranium from Africa came from the intelligence service of another Government. Under the terms of long-established agreements covering the sharing of intelligence information, no government can pass on such information to anyone else without the express consent of its originator.
I note the Minister’s statement that “The information upon which the assessment was made that Saddam Hussein's regime had attempted to procure uranium from Africa came from the intelligence service of another Government.” However, in the extract reproduced at the end of this letter, from the transcript of an interview with Downing Street's Director of Communications, Alastair Campbell on 27 June on Channel 4 News, Mr Campbell states that it was the fake documents which were from another country but that “the British intelligence put what they put in that dossier on the basis of British intelligence. Get your facts right before you make serious allegations against a government.” In view of his comment about factual accuracy, I should be grateful if you could clarify which is the correct position; that stated by Mr Rammell or by Mr Campbell?
If Mr Campbell either had his ‘facts’ wrong or was being deliberately misleading and the information upon which you based your assessment did not come from British intelligence, but as Bill Rammell states, from another country, I should be grateful if, when responding to my letter of 16 July you could provide details of the titles and relevant sections of the 'long standing agreements' which provide the exemption from 1441 that the UK Government seeks. Have the details of the agreements which form the basis of the exemption sought been formally communicated to the IAEA?
Finally, you will, no doubt, be aware that IAEA sources indicated the day after your response to my question on 16 July that no such exemption applies. For example the Guardian reported a quote from an IAEA spokeswoman, Melissa Fleming: "If there was any other evidence, it would still be appropriate for the IAEA to receive it".
I look forward to your response to the points raised in this and in my letter of 16 July.
Yours sincerely,
LYNNE JONES MP
Extract on the Niger Uranium issue from the transcript of the interview with Downing Street's Director of Communications Alastair Campbell on Channel 4 News. Click here for full transcript
27 June 2003
Jon Snow: The issue in play here today is absolutely that this war was fought on the basis of intelligence information. That intelligence information firstly; the charge that in the first document in September there were serious errors of fact.
Alastair Campbell: Sorry the first document in September? There were serious errors of fact? And what were they Jon?
Jon Snow: The Niger allegation in which the Minister who was supposed to have signed the nuclear purchasing order had himself resigned many years before.
Alastair Campbell: You know do you Jon that that was the basis on which British intelligence put that in the dossier?
You know that, do you? Because if you think that, you are wrong. There were no errors of fact in the WMD dossier in September 2002.
Jon Snow: The Niger source has nothing to do with us?
Alastair Campbell: It was another country's intelligence, and the British intelligence put what they put in that dossier on the basis of British intelligence. Get your facts right before you make serious allegations against a government.
16 July 2003
At Prime Minister's Questions today, I challenged Tony Blair about the failure to pass on to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the intelligence information upon which he relied when he told the House of Commons that he knew Iraq sought to buy significant quantities of Uranium from Africa. As the Prime Minister did not answer my questions, I have written to him today to seek further clarification and a copy of my letter is posted below. The Hansard record of my question and Tony's answer is also reproduced below:
Q6. [125879] Lynne Jones (Birmingham, Selly Oak): On 3 July, the Government finally admitted that they had not passed to the International Atomic Energy Agency the evidence on which the Prime Minister based his statement to the House that we know that Saddam has been trying to buy significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Is the Prime Minister not concerned that the failure of the source of that intelligence to pass it on to the IAEA for scrutiny constitutes a breach of article 10 of Security Council resolution 1441, and would he still use such words of absolute certainty today?
The Prime Minister: I stand by entirely the claim that was made last September. Let me make two points to my hon. Friend. First, as she knows, the intelligence on which we based that was not the so-called forged documents that have been put to the IAEA. The IAEA has accepted that it received no such forged documents from British intelligence: we had independent intelligence to that effect. Secondly, it may be worth pointing out to the House and to the public that it is not as if the link between Niger and Iraq was some invention of the CIA or Britain. We know that in the 1980s Iraq purchased more than 270 tonnes of uranium from Niger. Therefore, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility—let us at least put it like that—that Iraq went back to Niger again. That is why I stand by entirely the statement that was made in the September dossier.
Tony Blair MP
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London
SW1A 2AA
Our ref: MIN/D0045w/ID
Date: 16 July 2003
Dear Tony,
UK Government breach of Article 10 Security Council Resolution (SCR) 1441
I am writing to you regarding your failure to address my question put to you in the House today.
You will be aware that under Article 10. of SCR 1441 there is a request that all Member States provide any information relating to Iraqi prohibited programmes. On 3 July in a Parliamentary answer, Denis MacShane finally admitted that the UK Government did not pass to the IAEA any information on Iraqi attempts to procure uranium, which must include the information on which you based your statement to the House on 24 September that you knew Iraq had recently attempted to procure uranium.
I asked whether you were concerned about this breach of SCR 1441 – a point you did respond to in your reply and I should be grateful for your response.
Yours sincerely,
LYNNE JONES MP
04 July 2003
Press release: UK Government keeps intelligence from Weapons Inspectors
Various committees have been considering the evidence that was used to justify Britain’s involvement in the war on Iraq. Labour Against the War has been concerned that the public debate about our own investigations into this has focused around individuals rather than evidence. Click here for a summary of LATW's criticisms of the claims made by the UK Government to justify attacking Iraq. For information about my own work on this issue, see below.
18 June 2003
After trying, without success, to get information from the UK Government on whether they have any intelligence to show that there is a link between Iraq and al-Qaida, I sent the letter below to Tony Blair on 8 April asking whether or not he has evidence that President Bush was correct to state that "Iraq has aided, trained and harboured terrorists, including operatives of al-Qaeda"? As of 14 May, despite two reminders, I had not even received an acknowledgement and released a press release on Blair's silence: Silence from PM on crucial questions on weapons of mass destruction. On 23 May, I received an inadequate reply from the Prime Minister which I have posted below. I will be using all the Parliamentary avenues open to me to point out the inadequacy of his response. In particular I am interested in the Prime Minister's comment that "We remain confident in our assessment that Iraq sought to procure significant quantities of uranium from Africa". As the International Atomic Energy Agency reported to the Security Council on 7 March 2003 that the intelligence they had received making such claims was 'not authentic', I subsequently tabled a Parliamentary Question asking if the UK Government had given all the information it had to the weapons inspections teams. I received an answer from Mike O'Brien MP, Minister responsible at the Foreign Office, stating that the Government 'shared all relevant information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction with the weapons inspection teams from both UNMOVIC and the IAEA'... why then, didn't this convince Hans Blix or Mohammed El Baradei...? click here for the full text of the question and answer. I then asked a further question and received the following answer:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his Answer of 10th June, Official Report, column 793W, when the UK Government gave the IAEA the information upon which it based its assessment that Iraq sought to procure substantial quantities of uranium from Africa.
Date answered, 3 July 2003 Mr MacShane
The UK Government did not pass to the IAEA any information on Iraqi attempts to procure uranium.
Click here for the press release I have issued in response.
06 June 2003
Press release: Blair challenged over Niger uranium
27 May 2003
Press release: Blair avoids MP's questions on weapons of mass destruction
5 May 2003
In a recent email to me, my constituent, Bill Jones raises a key point very succinctly:
All the death, personal injury, and suffering caused to so many was predicated on the certainty of the existence of these weapons, and also "justified" by the failure of the UN inspection team to find them within a timetable shorter than the one the US and UK governments now seem to consider necessary for their own "inspectors".
Letter to Tony Blair 8 April 2003
Tony Blair MP
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London
SW1A 2AA
Our ref: MIN/D0045w/ID
Date: 08 April 2003
Dear Tony,
I am writing in response to your unsatisfactory replies to parliamentary questions.
On 24 September 2002, Official Report, Column 4, you made the following statement:
Let me tell the House what I know.