Back to Document View

LexisNexis™ Academic


Copyright 2002 Guardian Newspapers Limited  
The Guardian (London)

August 1, 2002

SECTION: Guardian Home Pages, Pg. 1

LENGTH: 653 words

HEADLINE: Saddam 'will have nuclear weapons material by 2005'

BYLINE: Julian Borger in Washington

BODY:
Saddam Hussein will have enough weapons-grade uranium for three nuclear bombs by 2005, an Iraqi ex-nuclear engineer told senators yesterday, as the US Congress held hearings on whether to go to war.

Launching what it called a "national discussion" amid reports that the Bush administration is honing plans for an assault on Iraq, the Senate foreign relations committee was also warned by an expert on the Iraqi military not to underestimate the strength of Saddam's army and air defences and not to doubt that any invasion would require overwhelming force.

A succession of expert s argued that the danger posed by Saddam was increasing as the Iraqi dictator tried to build chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

Khidir Hamza, who played a leading role in Iraq's nuclear weapon programme before defecting in 1994, cited German intelligence in saying: "With more than 10 tonnes of uranium and one tonne of slightly enriched uranium . . . in its possession, Iraq has enough to generate the needed bomb-grade uranium for three nuclear weapons by 2005."

He also claimed that Iraq was using companies in other countries to import equipment for its weapons programme and "gearing up to extend the range of its missiles" to reach Israel".

His pessimistic assessment was echoed by other witnesses, including the former UN chief weapons inspector, Richard Butler, who said: "There is now is evidence that Saddam has reinvigorated his nuclear weapons programme in the inspection-free years. And over two years ago, the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) estimate was that if he started work again on a nuclear weapon, he could build one in about two years."

However experts with less pessimistic views of Iraq's weapons capability, like Scott Ritter, another former UN inspector, had not been invited.

Mr Ritter said that there was little proof of Saddam's alleged arsenal and US armed forces were deeply uneasy over the prospect of a new war in Iraq. "Right now many generals are concerned that you have a bunch of neo-conservative ideologues running head-first into a war they don't understand," he said last night.

There were also calls for caution as the media reported that the Bush administration might be considering a lightning assault on Baghdad and other command centres using fewer than 80,000 troops.

Anthony Cordesman, a senior analyst at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington and the author of a new assessment of Iraqi military strength, had bitter criticism for US hawks who portrayed the 400,000-strong Iraqi army as an easy opponent: "To be perfectly blunt, I think only fools would bet the lives of other men's sons and daughters on their own arrogance and call this force a 'cakewalk'."

He said that though regular army units had less than 70% manning levels, Iraq still had 2,200 battle tanks, 3,700 other armoured vehicles and 2,400 major artillery weapons and warned that US warplanes attacking Iraq would fly into a blizzard of anti-aircraft fire.

The US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, continued to insist yesterday that no final decision had been taken, but made it clear that he believed that other initiatives, such as renewed UN weapons inspections, would not work. .

At talks in Vienna last month, the Iraqi government and the UN failed to agree on terms for the return of inspectors, and Baghdad has since maintained a defiant stand.

Congress has grown uneasy with the slide towards war. On Tuesday, two Democrat senators introduced a resolution opposing the use of force against Iraq without congressional authorisation or a formal declaration of war.

Chairing yesterday's hearings, Senator Joseph Biden urged the Bush administration to put more thought into how to deal with the aftermath if Saddam fell. "If we participate in Saddam's departure, what are our responsibilities the day after?" he said.

LOAD-DATE: August 1, 2002