James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Combating the spread of weapons of mass destruction with training & analysis

CNS Reports

Reinstitute Iraq Weapons Inspections

In the aftermath of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the United States has an unprecedented opportunity for international cooperation to address global security threats. As part of the US strategy, the Bush administration should seize the moment to restore the United Nations weapons inspections in Iraq. This move would help to contain the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and also reduce the risk of future mass-casualty terrorism.

Although some administration officials have called for military strikes against Iraq, such a step would risk alienating key Arab states whose cooperation is needed. A better approach to keeping Saddam Hussein in check would be to restore the UN inspections and reserve the threat of military action to enforce the regime.

After the 1991 Gulf War, the UN Security Council sought to eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction - nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons and missiles with a range of more than 150 kilometers - by establishing the UN Special Commission on Iraq to uncover and dismantle these capabilities. UNSCOM also established a system of ongoing monitoring and verification to prevent Iraq from reacquiring the banned weapons.

By the time Saddam Hussein expelled the inspectors in November 1998, they had largely destroyed Iraq's nuclear program and its vast stockpile of chemical arms, including mustard and nerve agents. UNSCOM also exposed an extensive biological weapons program, but because of the dual-use nature of many relevant production facilities, such as vaccine plants, the UN inspectors were unable to eliminate this threat.

Since 1998, the Security Council, locked in a dispute over the continued imposition of economic sanctions on Iraq, has lacked the unity needed to demand that the inspectors return and to back up this position with the threat of force. When the administration took office, it sought to restore inspections under the auspices of a new UN body, the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission.

But this US initiative foundered on Russia's insistence that Iraq be able to import certain dual-use items that the United States feared would be diverted for military purposes. In recent days, however, Moscow's apparent readiness to work with Washington to bring terrorists to justice, reportedly even to the point of supporting US military staging areas in Central Asia, may mean that it is prepared to break the logjam within the Security Council over weapons monitoring.

Why is restoring the UN weapons inspection regime in Iraq an important component of the response to the events of last week?

First, Iraq is a supporter of international terrorism and has been accused of succoring such groups as the Abu Nidal Organization, the Palestine Liberation Front, and the Arab Liberation Front. All three groups have offices in Baghdad and receive training, logistical assistance, and financial aid from the Iraqi leadership.

Iraq is also believed to retain a biological weapons program and, most likely, a stock of chemical weapons that it hid from inspectors. In the two and a half years since the inspectors were expelled, Baghdad has undoubtedly enhanced these capabilities.

Although there is no evidence that Iraq has supplied chemical or biological weapons to terrorists in the past, this potential remains. Unless UN monitoring can be restored as a means to restrict Iraq's acquisition of weapons of mass destruction, these potent armaments could find their way into the hands of operatives prepared to match or exceed the horrors of Sept. 11.

Iraq has a legitimate need for vaccine, pharmaceutical, and pesticide plants to meet the needs of its population. Yet without close monitoring on the ground, such dual-use facilities could easily be diverted to the production of chemical or biological weapons. A UN regime that includes ongoing monitoring of these plants with video cameras and routine visits, augmented by no-notice inspections, would not be foolproof, but it could do much to constrain Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs.

A second reason why monitoring and inspections would help the US response to the attacks is that it would facilitate a US rapprochement with Iran. The United States is seeking the assistance of Iran in pressuring Afghanistan to hand over Osama bin Laden and end support for his followers. Given the history of US-Iranian tensions, Washington has little that it can offer Tehran as an incentive. Because Iraq's chemical and biological warfare capabilities pose a grave threat to Iran, however, one incentive is a pledge to keep Iraq in check through the restoration of UN monitoring.

Iraq will not accept a new monitoring and inspection regime willingly. But Saddam Hussein fears US military action and is already taking defensive measures such as dispersing his forces. If the United States can obtain the backing of the UN Security Council to reintroduce the inspectors, Saddam can be expected to back down.

A failure to act now to restore the monitoring would leave Iraq armed with biological and chemical weapons, giving it the potential to provide terrorist clients the means for unprecedented mayhem.