'Smoking gun' is the failure to co-operate

Dr John Chipman, director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, assesses Colin Powell's speech to the UN

How convincing was the Powell presentation?

It produced, in effect, a "smoking gun" that there has been a material breach of Resolution 1441, which warned that Iraq would face "serious consequences" if it failed to co-operate. That was the principal purpose of the presentation. There was very compelling evidence about the campaign of denial and obstruction of the inspectors' work through a variety of different sources: eavesdropping, human intelligence and satellite imagery. It pulled together a picture of how Iraq is today actively obstructing the work of the inspectors and actively hiding materials relevant to weapons of mass destruction.

Is there a problem with information coming from defectors and satellite imagery?

We have to take great care with information provided by defectors. Normally we try to analyse and compare the details with other things we already know. In this particular case, the Americans are obviously satisfied with the quality.

Does it matter that not all the concealment and obstruction has taken place recently?

It was important that Powell was able to refer to current activity, which shows, in American eyes, the continued programme for developing WMD and their delivery systems. He discussed test sites for long-range ballistic missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles and the conversion of Mirage jets with spray tanks for chemical and biological agents.

What about the al-Qa'ida link to the Iraqi regime?

It was less compelling than the case he was making about Iraq's material breach and the weaponry. It was well known that al-Zarqawi is operating in Kurdistan, but what was new was the revelation about the al-Qa'ida extremists who have been operating in Baghdad for eight months and who are, in effect, developing cookbooks. That was stronger than I think people expected to hear. He was careful not to say that this was an ironclad case, however.

Does this "evidence" justify going to war?

An objective assessment is that it's a material breach of UN Resolution 1441. The nine rhetorical questions that he asked may not have been the "Adlai Stevenson moment" but his "Bush moment" ­ when George Bush challenged the Security Council to act on its own resolutions. Powell was challenging the Security Council by saying, in effect: "These are the facts, and are you going to let Saddam rewrite the wording of a resolution that members of the council spent seven weeks writing very carefully?"