|
Preventing Iraq from
building Weapons of Mass Destruction has been a US
objective for more than two decades. Airpower has played
a key role in that struggle, which is far from over.
Defense analyst Anthony H. Cordesman noted in a recent
analysis, "Iraq is the only major recent user
of Weapons of Mass Destruction." Iraq's Nuclear,
Biological, Chemical, and missile programs have emerged
as Saddam Hussein's personal projects and they have
survived many efforts to kill them off. From Israel's
raid on the Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981 to Desert
Storm in 1991 and another seven years of UN monitoring,
keeping Iraq's arsenal in check has generated sanctions,
inspections, and air strikes.

An Israeli F-16 pilot's view
as he lines up on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor
in 1981. (Photo via Israeli Air Force Magazine)
From the beginning, international concern has focused
on a specific problem: the danger Iraq would use its
Osirak reactor to produce weapons-grade material for
a bomb program. Iraq purchased the reactor from France
in 1975. It was designed as a civilian power plant
that could also produce highly enriched uranium.
Iraq's attempts to develop its own nuclear power sources
dated to the 1960s. However, Saddam Hussein himself
began the Iraqi nuclear bomb program in the 1970s while
he was still vice chairman of the Revolutionary Command
Council, prior to assuming total control of the nation.
The Osirak facility has been attacked several times.
Iran actually was the first to bomb the reactor area.
On Sept. 30, 1980, in the opening days of the Iran-Iraq
War, an Iranian aircraft lightly damaged the Osirak
facility. In response, the official Iraqi news agency
issued the following statement: "The Iranian people
should not fear the Iraqi nuclear reactor, which is
not intended to be used against Iran, but against the
Zionist entity." In other words, the target was
Israel.
Israel's Shocker
Israel took note and on June 7, 1981, shocked the
world with a daring and completely successful surprise
attack on Osirak.
Long before they actually pulled the trigger, Israel's
leaders had been debating such a move. Maj. Gen. David
Ivry, who was then chief of the Israeli Air Force,
recalled that one of the conditions for the attack
was "we have to attack before uranium was going
to get to the facility, because otherwise, after attacking
with uranium inside, it can cause radiation damage
to the environment and so on."
Even when faced with the looming threat of a functioning
nuclear reactor, Prime Minister Menachem Begin struggled
with the decision to attack. It took "about one
year" to get a consensus, recalled Ivry, "because
there were a lot of people who hesitated." Ivry
remembered going "every two or three weeks in
the Cabinet to talk about it again."
Even without a guarantee of final approval, Ivry set
the wheels in motion, holding detailed rehearsals of
the strike. Then-Maj. Gen. Yehoshua Saguy, head of
the Israeli Defense Forces' intelligence division,
was one who argued for a nonmilitary solution. On the
eve of the strike, Ivry recalled, "our leading
intelligence community recommended not to attack" because
of the risk to the unfolding peace process with Egypt.
However, Begin eventually concluded that Israel could
not wait and had to destroy the reactor. He saw it
as "my chance to save the Jewish people."
After Begin made the decision to attack, the head
of the Israeli Defense Forces, Gen. Rafael Eitan, briefed
the pilots who were preparing to carry out the mission. "The
alternative is our destruction," warned Eitan.
On June 7, 1981, all was in readiness. The starting
point for the raid was Etzion Air Base, located in
the Israeli-occupied eastern Sinai, close to the town
of Eilat. Israeli Air Force F-15 and new F-16 fighters
roared off the 8,000-foot-long runway just before 4
p.m. They flew low and level throughout the flight
to Iraq. At 5:35 p.m., they popped up to identify the
target and release their bombs. "In one minute
and 20 seconds, the reactor lay in ruins," reported
an IDF statement. All aircraft returned to base.
World reaction was intense. Condemnations of Israel
far outpaced congratulations. In the US, feelings were
mixed, and yet there was a strong undercurrent of relief.
Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) spoke for many when he
wrote in the New York Times: "The bold
Israeli move eliminates the immediate threat."
The destruction of Osirak took Iraq off the fast track
to nuclear weapons. Iraq responded with a double approach.
Baghdad put at least 20,000 people to work on the nuclear
program, pressing ahead with development of gas centrifuges
to produce bomb-grade material. The Iraqis also pursued
a second, outdated method based on the use of calutrons
for electromagnetic separation to produce highly enriched
uranium.
Flush with oil money in the 1980s, Iraq spent at least
$10 billion to buy illicit components. Manufacturing
and testing facilities were concealed at many sites
in Iraq. The strategy worked: Former chief UN nuclear
weapons inspector David A. Kay described how Iraq's
nuclear efforts were dismissed by experts as a "shop
'til you drop" program. The fact is that Iraq,
had it been left undisturbed, could have acquired a
nuclear bomb by 1992.

IAF used F-16s (such as this
one) and F-15s for the Osirak attack. The raid
took Iraq off the fast track to nuclear weapons,
but Baghdad then spent the next decade pouring
money and manpower into WMD development. (Photo
via Israeli Air Force Magazine)
Rude Interruption
A disturbance definitely was coming, however. Iraq's
invasion of Kuwait on Aug. 2, 1990, soon raised the
prospect of a war involving Weapons of Mass Destruction.
During the Iran-Iraq conflict, Iraq used mustard gas
and nerve agent weapons on 10 occasions between 1983
and 1988. About 25,000 Iranians and Kurds died, according
to an estimate by Cordesman.
Biological and Chemical Weapons facilities were the
top concerns of coalition planners. Gen. H. Norman
Schwarzkopf judged Iraq's key military strength to
be its "ability, evinced in the second Al-Faw
campaign of the Iran-Iraq War, to wage an offensive
with Chemical Weapons." In his book, It Doesn't
Take a Hero, Schwarzkopf noted that it was "the
possibility of mass casualties from Chemical Weapons" that
constituted "the main reason we had 63 hospitals,
two hospital ships, and 18,000 beds ready in the war
zone."
For President George H.W. Bush, the need to clean
out Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction was a compelling
reason for going to war. In his now-famous Jan. 5 "last
chance" letter to Saddam, Bush warned that the
US "will not tolerate the use of Chemical or Biological
Weapons or the destruction of Kuwait's oil fields and
installations."
Coalition air planners had identified "Nuclear,
Biological, and Chemical Weapons" as one of 12
strategic target subsets and put NBC targets high on
the priority list in case the war ended in just a few
days. Most of these suspected sites were chemical and
biological research, production, and storage facilities.
On Jan. 16, 1991, the target list contained just two
nuclear facility targets--though more than 20 facilities
later would be identified. Planners kept up the search
for nuclear and other sites even after the start of
the air campaign, but the task was daunting. As Kay
later remarked, "There was little hard analysis
that existed anywhere" on Iraq's nuclear capabilities.
The deployment of coalition forces spurred Iraq to
accelerate its nuclear efforts. According to Cordesman's
report, the goal was to produce a working bomb by April
1991. The crash program centered on recovering enriched
fuel from Iraq's French and Russian-built reactors,
in defiance of International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards
supposedly in place.
Iraq also explored building a radiological "dirty" bomb
that would spew radioactive material. It would furnish
Iraq with a "nuclear" weapon without Baghdad's
having to create a traditional nuclear explosion.

Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait
raised the specter of a war involving WMD.
Coalition aircraft, such as this F-117, targeted
nuclear reactors and biological/chemical weapons
facilities, setting back research and production
capability. (USAF photo)
Back to Osirak
Coalition aircraft flew 970 strikes against NBC targets,
using precision weapons for about 40 percent of those
strikes. The air attackers struck both of the nuclear
reactors built to replace Osirak. The Isis light-water
reactor was destroyed, and a larger reactor was damaged,
but the Iraqis hid whatever they could.
Air strikes hit hard against known biological warfare
facilities like those at Salman Pak, but by then, the
Iraqis "had relocated virtually all of their agent
production equipment to Al-Hakam and other facilities
and had buried all biological agent-filled munitions
and agent stockpiles in areas likely to escape bombing," according
to a Defense Department report.
Unfortunately, the lack of focused intelligence meant
that other targets appeared late in the game. One was
the Al-Athir complex 40 miles south of Baghdad, which
turned out to be the heart of the nuclear program.
The official Pentagon report on the Gulf War recorded
that Al-Athir "was not confirmed until late in
the war." The very last bomb dropped by an F-117
during the war targeted Al-Athir, inflicting only light
damage. In fact, subsequent inspections found that
Al-Athir was where Iraq worked with design of charges
for nuclear bombs.
The Gulf War Air Power Survey, sponsored by
the Air Force, concluded: "Overall, the United
States did not fully understand the target arrays comprising
Iraqi Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, and ballistic
missile capabilities before the Gulf War. The Iraqis
had, in fact, made these target systems as elusive
and resistant to accurate air attack as possible, with
some success."
Iraq had learned the lessons of Osirak.
The war ended after just 43 days of air operations.
That was enough to degrade Saddam's military capability,
but not enough to fully identify, much less eliminate,
the Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, and missile quartet.
Coalition air strikes ended the immediate threat of
an Iraqi nuclear bomb and set back research and production.
Kay commented 10 years later that, if the war had not
intervened, the Iraqis would have "been producing
enough material for somewhere around 10 to 20 nuclear
weapons a year, maybe more."
The Gulf War suddenly ended before the coalition could
ferret out all of Iraq's weapons workshops or fully
assess what remained.
In April 1991, the United Nations passed Resolution
687, which was, in effect, a conditional cease-fire
outlining an extensive plan for the disarmament of
Iraq, as the Stockholm International Peace Research
Institute described it. Iraq would remain under strict
international sanctions until the UN certified it to
be clear of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
The shooting had stopped, but the coalition military
forces remained in theater and international diplomats
still had a big job ahead of them.
The United Nations Security Council formed a special
committee--UNSCOM--to verify Iraqi compliance with
the resolution passed by the world body. It required
Iraq to destroy and undertake never to use, develop,
construct, or acquire nonconventional weapons or ballistic
missiles with a range greater than 93 miles. The UN
mandate gave the UNSCOM inspectors a free hand to inspect
and verify destruction of existing capabilities and
then monitor Iraq's continued compliance.
Another Iraqi Shock
Thus, the inspectors began what would prove to be
a seven-year effort to get to the bottom of the NBC
and missile arsenals. However, intelligence agencies
worldwide were in for a surprise. The magnitude of
the Iraqi program "was a shock to everyone," said
Kay. From 1991 through February 1998, UNSCOM supervised
destruction of large quantities of Chemical Weapons
components, including 28,000 munitions already loaded
with chemical agents.
Over the years, Iraq tried repeatedly to block inspectors
from using aircraft and delayed their access to sensitive
sites. It took continued pressure from the coalition
to prod Iraq into letting the inspectors do their jobs.
Not until August 1995 did the inspectors get a big
break. Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamel, Iraq's minister of industry
and minerals with responsibility for all Iraq's weapons
programs, defected to Jordan and started talking. Confronted
with detailed information about its activities, Iraq
retracted previous declarations and owned up to an
extensive Biological Weapons program and in-depth research
on long-range missiles.
The tally of Biological Weapons finally declared by
Iraq truly was astonishing. Between 1985 and 1990,
Iraq had fabricated 25 Biological Weapon missile warheads
and 166 400-pound aerial bombs filled with anthrax,
botulinum toxin, or aflatoxin. Raw supplies included
at least 19,000 liters of botulinum toxin solution,
8,500 liters of anthrax solution, and 2,500 liters
of aflatoxin. Iraq also admitted researching other
virus strains. In all, Iraq had run 18 major Biological
Weapons sites before the Gulf War. One report described
them as "nondescript" with "no guards
or visible indications they were a military facility."
More shocking, the inspectors confirmed that Iraq
was ready to use Biological Weapons. The research project
at Taji produced 25 warheads for use on Iraq's developmental
long-range Al-Hussein missile. Right up until Jan.
13, 1991, four days before the air campaign, Iraq was
practicing with Biological Weapons belly tanks on its
Mirage fighters.
Fortunately for the coalition, airmen in 1991 quickly
got the Iraqi air force under control, and surviving
front-line Mirage jets bugged out to Iran after a few
weeks.
The inspectors also found Iraq was still working on
Weapons of Mass Destruction even after the Gulf War.
In November 1995, Jordan turned back a shipment of
missile components headed to Iraq. UNSCOM inspectors
dredged up more missile components dumped in the Tigris
River. Tips from defectors led the inspectors to more
documents. As late as 1997, Iraq was believed to have
79 civilian facilities that could be quickly used for
Biological Weapons manufacturing.

After the Gulf War, a UN committee
was to certify that Iraq was clear of WMD.
Baghdad failed to cooperate. The US and Britain
then led Operation Desert Fox, striking targets
such as this missile research and development
center. (DOD photo)
"Good Bureaucrats"
Overall, said Kay, the Iraqis are "very good
bureaucrats." They filed quarterly reports on
weapons progress and kept detailed purchasing records.
Kay recalled how the Iraqis stalled a team waiting
to enter an eight-story building that was "jam
packed with documents." The Iraqis tried to move
the documents out, but the building elevator broke,
and they only managed to clear out the ground floor.
The most sensitive items were on the floors above,
and the UNSCOM team got them.
"Essentially, we managed to seize much of the
file records of their nuclear program," said Kay.
The run of success did not last long enough for UNSCOM
to complete its mission. Iraqi intransigence--and splits
in the UN Security Council--derailed the inspection
efforts.
Trouble began in September 1991, when Iraqi personnel
started to delay or block the free access of the UN
inspectors. By 1996, Iraq was regularly denying the
inspectors access to sites. UNSCOM inspectors videotaped
Iraqis burning and dumping files while waiting to enter
one site in September 1997.
Iraq's next tactic was to designate new "presidential" sites
and then say they were off limits. At one point, Iraq
expelled American nationals on the inspection team,
letting them return only after diplomatic intervention
by Russia. At the same time, China, France, and Russia
cooled toward the inspection process and slowed the
Security Council's momentum. In October 1997, those
three permanent members abstained from a Security Council
finding that Iraq was not cooperating with inspectors.
Despite a visit to Baghdad by the UN Secretary-General
Kofi A. Annan to meet with Saddam Hussein in February,
the situation deteriorated further in 1998. That fall,
Iraq ceased cooperation with UNSCOM entirely.
The only alternative left was military attack. In
the fall of 1998, the Clinton Administration, with
British backing, sought allied support for a limited
air campaign to target missile production facilities,
air defenses, and other key targets. The campaign was
set to launch on Nov. 14, 1998. However, Clinton, on
the advice of National Security Advisor Sandy Berger,
called off the strike with less than an hour to go
before the first Tomahawk land attack missiles were
to be airborne.
Disappointed Saudi allies retracted their support
for offensive operations. With no further progress
on inspections, the US and British settled on a scaled-down
strike plan. Word was passed to the inspectors to leave
Baghdad, and on Dec. 16, 1998, the US and British led
a three-day air campaign under the name Operation Desert
Fox.
"Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten
his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison
gas, or Biological Weapons," Clinton said. Secretary
of Defense William S. Cohen said the first goal of
the operation was "to degrade Saddam Hussein's
ability to make and to use Weapons of Mass Destruction."
70-Hour War
In 70 hours, US forces struck about 100 targets with
a combination of Navy and land-based fighters, bombers,
and cruise missiles. Subsequent reports claimed good
results on targets, including missile production facilities.
The UNSCOM process managed, despite Iraqi intransigence,
to destroy weapons and uncover much more of Iraq's
weapons programs. When the UN inspectors left Baghdad
in December 1998, the chance to lift sanctions against
Iraq went with them. Resolution 687--the conditional
cease-fire--could not be fully verified. After years
of propaganda about the impact of the sanctions on
civilian life, the sanctions policy itself was a liability.
With inspectors out, there was no way to know whether
Iraq had restarted its WMD programs. UNSCOM inspectors
left behind automated video cameras to monitor sensitive
sites, but by 1999, the Iraqis had dismantled them.
All along, Iraq insisted on keeping together the teams
of scientists and experts from the weapons programs.
Most of these key personnel remained in Iraq. In August
2000, the CIA told Congress that, after Desert Fox, "Baghdad
again instituted a reconstruction effort on those facilities
destroyed by the US bombing, to include several critical
missile production complexes and former dual-use [Chemical
Weapon] production facilities." The CIA demurred,
saying that it had no "direct evidence" of
renewed Iraqi WMD programs but said that "given
its past behavior, this type of activity must be regarded
as likely." The CIA then went on to describe Iraq's
efforts to build short-range missiles and convert Czech
L-29 jet trainers into unmanned aeriel vehicles.
"The United Nations assesses that Baghdad has
the capability to reinitiate both its CW and BW programs
within a few weeks to months, but without an inspection
monitoring program, it is difficult to determine if
Iraq had done so," the CIA reported to Congress.
Since Iraq retained a large pool of experts and some
nonweapons-grade uranium, restarting a nuclear bomb
program is also a possibility, especially if Iraq could
import fissile material clandestinely. Clinton said
at the time of Desert Fox in 1998, "left unchecked,
Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."
Since Sept. 11, the focus on homeland security and
the war against terrorism has put Iraq back in the
spotlight. If the confrontation continues, airpower
may once again be summoned to counter Weapons of Mass
Destruction.
Pressure to develop a strategy to topple Saddam gained
strength in fall 2001. The heat of the moment turned
attention to Iraq as a supporter of terrorists and
possible nest of Osama bin Laden sympathizers. Yet
the anti-Iraq rhetoric was not just about settling
old scores or expanding the war on terrorism right
away. As it had a decade earlier, the issue of Saddam's
ability and presumed lack of inhibition about using
WMD lay at the heart of the Administration's cautious
and cryptic remarks on Iraq.
In October 2001, Bush commented, "After all,
he [Saddam] gassed his own people" and added "we
know he's been developing Weapons of Mass Destruction." Former
Congressman Newt Gingrich put it bluntly in a New
York Times interview, saying: "If we don't
use this as the moment to replace Saddam after we replace
the Taliban, we are setting the stage for disaster."
"Just a Dangerous State"
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice clearly
drew the link. "We worry about Saddam Hussein," she
said in an interview with Al Jazeera TV. "We worry
about his Weapons of Mass Destruction that he's trying
to achieve." A senior Pentagon official claimed
in December that the situation with Iraq's WMD had "gotten
worse since UNSCOM was driven out." He added, "Iraq
is just a dangerous state, purely and simply."
Iraq is probably not in position to produce its own
fissile material for as much as five years. Still,
experts believe Iraq could buy black-market weapons
material with relative ease. "I think everyone
that I know of in the community agrees that if the
Iraqis had the nuclear material, high-enriched uranium
or plutonium, they would have a weapon in less than
a year," said Kay. "The explosive manufacturing
and missile program has gone ahead."
The United States and coalition partners have succeeded
in containing Iraq. That, however, provides no guarantee
that Iraq could not rebuild its WMD capability. In
May 2002, the UN Security Council voted to relax sanctions,
and initiatives to get inspectors back inside Iraq
remain in play.
If experience is any guide, even the most capable
UN inspectors will need years to hunt down what progress
Iraq has made on Weapons of Mass Destruction since
1998. Meanwhile, Saddam's WMD are a potential threat
to the world whether in his hands or--worse--those
of sympathetic terrorists. The menace remains.
President George W. Bush told a television interviewer
in April: "I made up my mind that Saddam needs
to go."
Rebecca Grant is a contributing editor of Air Force Magazine.
She is president of IRIS Independent Research, Inc.,
in Washington, D.C., and has worked for Rand, the Secretary
of the Air Force, and the Chief of Staff of the Air
Force. Grant is a fellow of the Eaker Institute for
Aerospace Concepts, the public policy and research
arm of the Air Force Association's Aerospace Education
Foundation. Her most recent article, "In
Defense of Fighters," appeared in the July
2002 issue.
Copyright Air Force Association. All rightsreserved.
|