[A-List] UK state: Iraq crisis

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

Doubts of third analyst revealed

Ewen MacAskill
Tuesday September 16, 2003
The Guardian

A third Ministry of Defence intelligence analyst expressed concern that the
Iraq dossier on weapons was being hyped up at the time the document was
being drafted, the Hutton inquiry heard yesterday.

An MoD confidential memo revealed that an analyst, whose name had been
blacked out, expressed doubts over the language used in the claims that Iraq
had continued to produce chemical and biological weapons and that these
could be ready for use within 45 minutes.

The inquiry has already heard that two intelligence officials within the MoD
complained about the language of the dossier. Two weeks ago Brian Jones, who
was head of defence intelligence staff at the MoD dealing with weapons of
mass destruction, told Lord Hutton he believed parts of the dossier had been
over-egged.

The memo disclosed yesterday was sent on September 17 last year from another
analyst to the joint intelligence staff putting together the dossier,
published on September 24.

After reading a draft of the dossier, the analyst objected to the claim that
Iraq "has continued to produce chemical and biological agents" as "too
strong". The analyst was only prepared to go so far as to say "has
probably".

No evidence has been found that Iraq did produce chemical and biological
weapons in the four years after UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in 1998. The
analyst also warned the claim that such weapons "could be ready within 45
minutes of an order to use them" was "too strong considering the
intelligence on which it is based".

Giving evidence yesterday, Tony Cragg, former deputy chief of defence
intelligence, said he knew the identity of the author of the memo and
confirmed that the author was not Dr Jones. James Dingemans, counsel for the
inquiry, asked whether a pattern was emerging. Mr Cragg, whose evidence was
supportive of the government, replied: "In terms of patterns or trends, I
think not really." He concluded: "In my view, the dossier was prepared and
produced by a rigorous process of drafting."

This view was echoed by his former boss, Air Marshal Sir Joe French, the
head of defence intelligence staff at the time of the drafting of the
dossier, who also gave evidence yesterday. He acknowledged a range of views
had been put forward and said that was the nature of the process. But he
said: "I was content with the wording that appeared in the final draft."