Rumsfeld in ‘shocking’ admission over Iraq war

US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld yesterday admitted the US motive for going to war with Iraq was motivated by the events of September 11, rather than any new information on weapons of mass destruction.

“The coalition did not act in Iraq because we had discovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq’s pursuit of weapons of mass murder”, Mr Rumsfeld said while testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“We acted because we saw the existing evidence in a new light through the prism of our experience on September 11,” he said.

Rumsfeld’s admissions follow a softening of the British government’s line on the issue. British Prime Minister Tony Blair justified sending troops to Iraq by claiming prior to the war Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. On Tuesday, he told a House of Commons committee weapons’ programmes would be found.

Yesterday, his official spokesman said “concrete evidence” of the “products” of weapons of mass destruction programmes would be found. This is seen as preparing the British public for the fact weapons of mass destruction will not be found.

Senior British government sources told the BBC they believe actual weapons of mass destruction are unlikely to turn up in Iraq.

In Washington, the Bush administration insisted information on Saddam’s alleged illicit weapons programmes was solid even though one of President Bush’s claims was based on a forgery.

But a group of arms control experts accused the administration of misrepresenting intelligence to justify the war. When the war began in March, Iraq posed no threat to the US or to its neighbours, said Greg Thielmann, an official with the State Department’s intelligence bureau who retired last year.

Speaking at an Arms Control Association forum, Mr Thielmann described Rumsfeld’s statement as shocking.

Iraq had no active nuclear weapons programme, he said.

He added while CIA director George Tenet told Congress Iraq had Scud missiles, the intelligence finding actually was that the missiles could not be accounted for.

He said the administration approach seemed to say: “We know the answers, give us the intelligence to support those answers.”