By Sam Gardiner | Earlier in the week the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) issued another of its dossiers. This one addresses nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Remember the IISS track record with dossiers? Their most famous report came in September 2002 when we were told Iran could be as close as two years to having a nuclear weapon. Remember the interviews with the authors of the study?
- Does Iraq have weapons of mass destruction: “Yes.”
Chemical and biological weapons:
- “On chemical weapons, our net assessment is that Iraq has probably retained a few hundred tons of mustard gas and precursors…”
- “As for biological weapons, Iraq probably retained substantial growth media and perhaps thousands of liters of anthrax…”
And if we don’t do something in the next six months,
- “…we’ll end up with a regime in Baghdad with nuclear weapons in two years’ time.”
The study became a major tool of those arguing for the invasion of Iraq in both the UK and the United States. It was used by Tony Blair and was a favorite of the US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.
IISS report 2005
In September 2005 IISS did another study. This one was “Iran’s Strategic Weapons Programs: A Net Assessment.” Although the authors of this study were more cautious, they did declare that Iran could have a nuclear weapon in five years or so.
In neither the press materials or in the press conference did IISS make reference to the serious errors that had been made in the assessment of Iraq’s WMD programs.
Now we have the most recent study. The caution has gone. The editor of the study boldly declared, “We take it for granted that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon.” Without explanation, he dismisses he US National Intelligence Estimate that did not take that for granted.
Again, there is no reference to the previous bad assessment or the assessment Iran could have a weapon in just two years from now.
Doing studies means never having to say you are sorry.
The Telegraph, the Times and the Guardian carried stories this week on the IISS study. All three had frightening headlines: “Middle East in nuclear race to match Iran,” “Iran’s nuclear programme ‘may spark Middle East weapons race,’” and “Iran’s nuclear programme could be triggering a race to develop atomic weapons in the Middle East, a study warned.”
All three of the stories were probably good journalism. The reporters, two of them diplomatic editors, represented the IISS study well. None of them, however, reminded us of the history of previous IISS mistakes or of their own newspaper’s mistakes in covering previous studies.
I guess doing journalism also means never having to say you are sorry.
Notes
* These statements are from a phone interview by LA Weekly with Colonel Terence Taylor on September 20, 2002. Taylor was one of principal authors of the study.
