WASHINGTON -- Contradicting the main argument for the war in Iraq, the top U.S. arms inspector said Wednesday he found no evidence that Iraq produced weapons of mass destruction after 1991. He also concluded that Saddam Hussein's ability to develop such weapons had dimmed -- not grown -- during a dozen years of sanctions before last year's U.S.-led invasion.
Contrary to prewar statements by President Bush, Saddam did not have chemical and biological stockpiles when the war began and his nuclear capabilities were deteriorating, not advancing, said Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group.
But Duelfer also supports Bush's argument that Saddam remained a threat. Interviews with the toppled leader and other former Iraqi officials made clear that Saddam still wanted to pursue weapons of mass destruction and hoped to revive his weapons program if U.N. sanctions were lifted.
"What is clear is that Saddam retained his notions of use of force and had experiences that demonstrated the utility of WMD," Duelfer told Congress.
Campaigning in Pennsylvania, Bush defended the decision to invade.
"There was a risk, a real risk, that Saddam Hussein would pass weapons or materials or information to terrorist networks," Bush said in a speech in Wilkes Barre, Pa. "In the world after Sept. 11, that was a risk we could not afford to take."
But Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards, campaigning in West Palm Beach, Fla., said Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney "are in a complete state of denial" about the war.
Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said Duelfer's findings undercut the administration's argument for war. "We did not go to war because Saddam had future intentions to obtain weapons of mass destruction," said Levin.
The report also concludes that the Iraqi government was able to manipulate a U.N. oil-for-food program to avoid the sanctions' effects for a few years, acquiring billions of dollars to import goods such as parts for missile systems. Duelfer also in the report accused the former head of the U.N. oil-for-food program of accepting bribes in the form of vouchers for Iraqi oil sales from Saddam's government.
He said he believed sanctions against Saddam -- even though they appeared to work in part -- were unsustainable in the long term.
On specific points, Duelfer said:
He concluded that aluminum tubes suspected of being used for enriching uranium for use in a nuclear bomb were likely destined for conventional rockets and that there is no evidence Iraq sought uranium abroad after 1991. Both findings contradict claims made by Bush and other top administration officials before the war.
It is unclear what happened to banned weapons produced before 1991 that Saddam had declared in the 1990s to the United Nations but were never accounted for. For example, Saddam declared having 550 155-millimeter artillery shells with mustard agents, but it's not known what became of most of them. He said 53 "residual rounds" have been found and the others are not considered a significant threat.
The likelihood of finding the stockpiles that the president spoke about before the war was "less than 5 percent."
The inspectors found no evidence that Saddam was passing weapons of mass destruction material to terrorist groups but added that wasn't a strong focus of his report.
Traveling in Africa, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush's main foreign ally in the war, said the report shows Saddam was "doing his best" to evade the U.N. sanctions.
Connect with the Southeast Missourian Newsroom:
For corrections to this story or other insights for the editor, click here. To submit a letter to the editor, click here. To learn about the Southeast Missourian’s AI Policy, click here.