Prime Minister John Howard Thursday highlighted aspects of the Butler report that received less emphasis in media coverage, including the assertion that even now it would be "rash" to say that evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction "does not exist or will never be found."
Howard also pointed to another less-noted finding in the much-anticipated report by former senior civil servant Lord Robin Butler, relating to claims that Saddam Hussein had tried to obtain ingredients for nuclear weapons in Africa.
While a lot of attention has been paid to Butler's discrediting of the claim that Saddam could deploy WMDs in 45 minutes, less notice has been given to his finding regarding Iraqi-Niger contacts relating to uranium.
Last year, President Bush was attacked by Democrats for saying in his State of the Union address six months earlier: "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Critics said the information was wrong, and accused Bush of misleading the American people.
But in his report, Butler said Iraqi officials did visit Niger in 1999, and that Britain had received "credible" intelligence from several sources "indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium."
"The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium," Butler continued, noting that the British government had never claimed that Saddam actually bought the material.
Howard brought that finding to journalists' attention Thursday, adding: "Now isn't that interesting?"
The Australian premier also told Sky News television that nothing in the Butler report changed his position "that we had strong intelligence to justify our decision."
"If we'd have had our time over again, I would have taken the same decision."
The assessment that Saddam Hussein possessed non-conventional weapons and programs was Washington's primary stated justification for going to war to overthrow his regime, and the main reason given by Britain and Australia for participating in the military effort.
Like Blair and Bush, Howard has faced strong domestic criticism since the war ended over inspectors' failure to find stockpiles of WMDs.
Butler reached the conclusion that Saddam Hussein did not have significant stocks of WMDs, if any, prior to the war.
But he also concluded from his investigations that the regime did have "the strategic intention of resuming the pursuit of prohibited weapons programs, including if possible its nuclear weapons program, when United Nations inspection regimes were relaxed and sanctions were eroded or lifted."
"In support of that goal [Baghdad] was carrying out illicit research and development, and procurement, activities, to seek to sustain its indigenous capabilities," Butler said, adding that Iraq was also developing ballistic missiles with a longer range than allowed under U.N. Security Council resolutions.
Howard said the inquiry findings had been less critical of the British government than many had predicted.
"I think what the Butler report does is totally clear Mr. Blair of allegations that he pressured the intelligence services. And it also puts paid to this idea that there was bad faith used by the British government."
The leader of the official opposition Labor Party, Mark Latham, said Australia was still awaiting an apology from Howard "because he is one of the few world leaders who has not 'fessed up to the fact that there are no weapons of mass destruction."
"He sent Australians to war for a purpose that wasn't true," added Latham, who opposed the war, and has pledged to bring home Australian troops in Iraq "by Christmas" if Labor wins a general election before then.
Although stockpiles of WMD have not been found in Iraq, some evidence of the existence of non-conventional weapons there has emerged.
Last May, a roadside bomb which exploded near a U.S. military convoy was found to contain the nerve agent, sarin. No serious injuries occurred.
"The former regime had declared all such rounds destroyed before the 1991 Gulf War," U.S. military spokesman Brig.-Gen. Mark Kimmitt was quoted as saying at the time.
The New York Times said on May 18 that the discovery "appears to offer some of the most substantial evidence to date that Mr. Hussein did not destroy all of the banned chemical agent, as he claimed before the war last year."
Sarin is a deadly gas which can be used as a chemical weapon.
Twelve people died and thousands were injured from gas inhalation when a religious cult released sarin in an attack on a Tokyo subway in 1995.
Full text of the Butler Report
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
