January 25, 2004

What Kay Also Said

Last week the media breathlessly reported that U.S. WMD inspector David Kay was resigning his position. In interviews, Kay had concluded that we were just not going to find stockpiles of WMD's in Iraq, having probably already found "85% of what we were going to find". Speculation on the reasons for Kay's resignation centered on "disillusionment" with the search, although Kay denied that when asked about it directly.

Today the Telegraph is reporting on an exclusive interview with Kay, in which he confirms longstanding rumors that some WMD material had been moved to Syria:

(Kay) said that he had uncovered evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before last year's war to overthrow Saddam.

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

Dr Kay's comments will intensify pressure on President Bashar Assad to clarify the extent of his co-operation with Saddam's regime and details of Syria's WMD programme. Mr Assad has said that Syria was entitled to defend itself by acquiring its own biological and chemical weapons arsenal."

The final report from Kay's team is not yet complete, but this statement about the transfer to Syria, regardless of how much or how little material it turns out to be, certainly is somewhat at odds with Kay's answer to the question of what happened to the Iraqi stockpiles of WMD's.

"I don't think they existed", said Kay.

So which was it Mr. Kay? Aren't these two statements a bit contradictory?

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons"

"a lot of material went to Syria..including components of Saddam's WMD programme".

As we have been told countless times in the last year or so, the amounts of certain chemical or biological agents required to kill hundreds of thousands of people could fit in a box the size of a microwave. So I suppose that it wouldn't have to be a "large stockpile" to be militarily and strategically significant, would it?

UPDATE 1/26: Justin Katz has a good post on the topic which contains this key quote from an interview with David Kay:

I actually think the intelligence community owes the President [an explanation], rather than the President owing the American people. We have to remember that this view of Iraq was held during the Clinton administration and didn't change in the Bush administration. It is not a political "got you" issue; it is a serious issue of how you could come to a conclusion that is not matched by the future.

UPDATE 1/29: Good article in the Washington Post on the topic.

Posted by dan at January 25, 2004 8:47 PM