We saw no WMD - No 10 labelled us 'naive dupes'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.In the tense countdown to war, with highly charged, passionate debate raging, Tony Blair produced his famous dossier on the imminent threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction - justification for the invasion.
On the day the dossier appeared, 24 September 2002, I was among a group of British journalists taken by the Iraqi regime to some of the sites named as production centres for chemical and biological weapons. We reported we had seen nothing overtly suspicious, stressing the caveat that not having scientific knowledge, ours was a superficial judgement.
We were, said Downing Street officials, "naive dupes" who had fallen for the regime's guile, indeed our newspapers were irresponsible for printing such propaganda. The British government then made public satellite photographs which claimed to show the Iraqis were engaged in secretly reconstructing the Osirak nuclear complex, now renamed al-Tuwaitha.
We have now found out, of course, that the highly alarmist allegations made in the dossier, and a second one produced just before the war, were false.
The Iraq Survey Group's report is the most high profile of a series of demolitions of the WMD argument made by the British and the American governments. But at the time, vehemence of the British government's attacks on journalists trying to research claims was startling.
We, the media, had chosen the locations on the September dossier to visit, decided on the basis that they appeared to be the most prolific for producing WMD agents, and the tour had began two hours after we had given our choice to the Iraqi authorities. One of the sites visited was al-Qa'qa, a military complex 30 miles south of Baghdad. According to the No 10 dossier, al-Qa'qa had been dismantled by United Nations inspectors after the 1991 Gulf War, but had since been rebuilt and was producing phosgene, a precursor for nerve agents.
We also went to Amariyah Sera vaccine plant at Abu Ghraib, a suburb of Baghdad, which had, according to the dossier, restarted its use of "storing biological agents, seed stocks and conducting biological warfare associated genetic research" which it had been doing before the first war.
At al-Qa'qa the director-general Sinan Rasim Said showed a letter from UNSCOM dated 13 August 1988 authorising maintenance work. "They did not dismantle anything here. Mr Blair's report is totally wrong," he said. This was dismissed by British officials, not even considered worthy of a serious response. Yet, when the UN inspectors returned to Iraq under Hans Blix they could not find any evidence to back up the claims in either of the plants. And the Iraq Survey Group has done the same.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments