Australia 'knew of debate over Iraqi weapons evidence'
Australia knew some US government agencies had reservations about claims Baghdad was rebuilding its nuclear weapons programme when it sent 2,000 troops to fight in Iraq, Prime Minister John Howard said today.
The threat of Saddam Hussein passing on nuclear, chemical or biological weapons to terrorists was one of his main reasons for committing Australian soldiers to the US-led invasion.
Like US President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair, Howard has come under fire at home over claims his government misused intelligence to justify its role in the conflict.
Opposition parties have used their control of the Senate to set up a parliamentary inquiry to probe exactly what the government was told.
Today’s Sydney Morning Herald newspaper said Canberra was told the US State Dept and the Dept of Energy had challenged the accuracy of CIA intelligence claiming Iraq had reactivated its nuclear programme.
Former State Department intelligence official Greg Thielmann was quoted as saying CIA claims that Iraq was rebuilding it nuclear weapons programme were based on evidence Baghdad was buying aluminium tubes intended for gas centrifuges to reprocess uranium.
According to the paper, Thielmann said the US State Dept did not accept that interpretation and Australian intelligence agencies would have been given that analysis.
“We agreed with the Department of Energy – who were the US experts on centrifuge technology – who said that this was not for the nuclear weapons programme,” he said.
In a major speech to Parliament on February 4, Howard specifically quoted a CIA analysis that Baghdad was “reconstituting its nuclear weapons programme”.
Howard today defended Australia’s participation in the war saying what he told MPs had been “accurate”.
But he later issued a statement saying Australian intelligence agencies knew of questions over the aluminium tubes.
“Australian agencies were aware of the debate in the United States about the purpose of the aluminium tubes. I made no reference to aluminium tubes in my statement to parliament of February 4 or subsequently,” he said.
Howard contended that his government had not gone to war over the nuclear weapons claims, but because Iraq refused to bend to the will of the international community.
“Our case was built on the failure of Iraq to comply with the UN resolution and that still remains the case and I feel very strong in my belief that Australia did the right thing,” he said.
