Scientists question Bush case against Iraq

One of the key pieces of "evidence" in the Bush administration's case for military action against Saddam Hussein is being questioned by a number of leading US scientists. It is also alleged that the administration is silencing dissent among its own analysts who have raised questions.

Two weeks ago the administration heralded the discovery of shipments of thousands of high-strength aluminum tubes to Iraq as proof that President Saddam was secretly trying to develop a programme to produce nuclear weapons. Such tubes can be used in the production of enriched uranium, vital for such a programme.

The discovery of the tubes – which were intercepted en route to Iraq – was leaked to a leading American newspaper. Vice-President Dick Cheney went on a television talk show to say the tubes were evidence that President Saddam was "actively and aggressively" trying to develop a nuclear programme.

But a report from the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) says such claims cannot be made. The report – a draft of which has been obtained by The Independent on Sunday – concludes: "By themselves these attempted procurements are not evidence that Iraq is in possession of, or close to possessing, nuclear weapons. They do not provide evidence that Iraq has an operating centrifuge plant or when such a plant could be operational."

Washington says that in the past 14 months it has seized two separate shipments of tubes to Iraq. While it refuses to say where the seizures took place, it has been reported that at least one of the shipments originated in China and was intercepted in Jordan. There is no evidence that any of the tubes actually reached Iraq.

The shipments sparked concern among the US intelligence community because of the use of such tubes in the centrifuges employed to make enriched uranium for nuclear bombs. Because these centrifuges rotate up to 1,000 times a minute, it is essential to use high-strength, heat-resistant metals.

But the report produced by ISIS, an independent group that studies nuclear and other security issues, questions this conclusion on several technical grounds, suggesting that, based on information released by the government, the tubes were of a thickness that would make them difficult to weld. It also says that by the time Iraq's nuclear weapons programme was destroyed by coalition forces during the Gulf war, it had abandoned aluminum for specialised steel and carbon fibre.

David Albright, the director of ISIS and a scientist with first-hand experience of Iraq's nuclear weapons programme as a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency's inspection team, said there was a debate within the US scientific community about the government's claims but added that the Bush administration had clamped down on such discussion. "I don't know why there is not more debate. I have heard that a lot of people are expected to remain silent. [The Bush administration] has certainly scared people," he said. "I met one government scientist who said his phone was being monitored."

Despite such alleged tactics, there are signs of dissent in the scientific community. A report in the current edition of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, published by the Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science, also questions the tubing "evidence". It says: "The aluminum tubing story -- and others to come -- may be taken at face value by an insufficiently sceptical press, but the decision to go to war is simply too important to let the administration 'wing it' in presenting its rationale."