International Information Programs
Office of Research Issue Focus Foreign Media Reaction

April 7, 2004

April 7, 2004





**  The admittedly "flawed data" on Iraqi WMD exposes the U.S. as a "naked aggressor."


**  The comments lodge a "direct accusation" against U.S. intelligence agencies.


**  Powell's "self-criticism on WMD" should spur the U.S. to rethink its Iraq policy.   


**  Some Euros hail Powell's honesty and "greatness to concede."




The U.S.' 'real intention' in Iraq was 'regional dominance'--  Euro critics said Secretary Powell's confession "completes the picture of a great Iraq lie"; Turkey's sensationalist Posta declared all of the pretexts" for the war "have proven to be false."  Germany's right-of-center Mittelbayerische Zeitung blasted the "professionally organized campaign of lies" and "dilettantish falsifications and systematic disinformation" used to justify the war.  Outside Europe, papers saw Powell's comments as proof the U.S. "made the decision to invade Iraq" first and "then looked for evidence of WMD to justify it."  Center-right Pakistan concluded that "America is interested only in the oil of Iraq, and its geo-strategic importance."


'Intensified scrutiny' of the CIA--  Some outlets claimed this was the "first time" a senior U.S. official had "publicly criticized the spies" who provided "probably wrong" data on Iraqi WMD, casting doubt on the "caliber of the security services" in the U.S.  Belgium's Christian-Democrat De Standaard opined that U.S. agencies were "so blinded by their belief that Saddam had bad intentions that they did not see the correct picture."  Others labeled Powell's "confession...a blow" to the credibility of the White House as it enters "full election campaign mode." 


'Setting the record straight' will help 'resolve the Iraqi conflict'--  Left-leaning papers urged the U.S. to "do some real soul-searching" following Powell's comments.  Portugal's influential Publico stressed the "heartbreaking" results of the war:  "a ruined country, a white-hot fire of deaths and mutilations without optimistic scenarios."  The elite Jordan Times hoped the "admission of having erred" would accompany a "genuine interest in seeing Iraq and its people on the road to peace, democracy and prosperity."  Pakistan's populist Khabrain concluded that "after this admission" the U.S. lacks "any justification to keep its control over Iraq."   


'Powell's reputation is at stake'--  Writers split over the reasons for Powell's "critical self-reflection" regarding the "dramatically powerful and persuasive" WMD claims he made at the UNSC.  Sympathetic German columnists said his remarks prove "he has scruples," calling "Powell's step an appeal to the whole U.S. administration to become honest."  Critics countered that Powell "cannot avoid responsibility" for his UNSC presentation, because he allowed "others to misuse him."  Jordan's center-left Al-Dustour assailed Powell's attempt to "exonerate himself," labeling his "belated opportunistic move, not a sign of courage."


EDITOR:  Ben Goldberg


EDITOR'S NOTE:  Media Reaction reporting conveys the spectrum of foreign press sentiment.  Posts select commentary to provide a representative picture of local editorial opinion.  This report summarizes and interprets foreign editorial opinion and does not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government.  This analysis was based on 26 reports from 14 countries over 2 - 7 April 2004.  Editorial excerpts from each country are listed from the most recent date.




FRANCE:  "Secretary Powell’s Confession"


Jean-Louis Turlin in right-of-center Le Figaro (4/5): "Just when President Bush’s credibility is suffering over the motives for waging war on Iraq and over the terrorist threat before 9/11, the U.S. President could have done without Secretary Powell’s comments on his trip back from Brussels.… But the good soldier was eager to protect his own credibility and so Secretary Powell finally confessed that the ‘proof’ that WMD existed in Iraq was not as ‘solid’ as presented by the CIA.… Secretary Powell is distancing himself from the Agency. His confession is a blow to Vice President Cheney’s own credibility, and indirectly to the President’s.”


"Secretary Powell Takes a Step Back"


Fabrice Rousselot in left-of-center Liberation (4/5): “Secretary Powell’s remarks, even if made to a handful of journalists in the middle of the night, mark the first direct accusation by a member of the Bush administration against the work accomplished by American intelligence agencies on Iraq.”


GERMANY: "Withdrawal"


Dietrich Alexander noted in an editorial in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin (4/5):  "Colin Powell had prepared his withdrawal.  In January, he expressed doubts that Iraq ever had WMD, in February he said he would not know whether he would have ordered Iraq's invasion if it had been clear that Saddam did not have banned weapons.  And with his latest remark, the last stone of the U.S. argumentation has fallen.  Powell's remarks are outlining the new defense line of the U.S. administration in this election year.  Its credibility is still suffering but it cannot be accused of deliberately deceiving the public because it relied on the intelligence services.  The question will now be whether the intelligence services will accept playing the role of the bogey man.  And it will be a different question whether the world wants to believe this."


"Systematic Disinformation"


Right-of-center Mittelbayerische Zeitung of Regensburg argued (4/5):  "The Iraq war was legitimized with dilettantish falsifications and systematic disinformation. America's omniscient intelligence service CIA allowed others--probably contrary to better knowledge--to use it for a propaganda campaign.  The first victim of every war is always the truth.  In this question, we should never harbor any illusion.  But when preparing the Iraq war, the U.S. administration used a high degree of criminal energy to fool billions of people.  With a professionally organized campaign of lies the image of democracy was discredited exactly in those countries whose societies they wanted to enthuse for this model."


"Question Of Credibility"


Matthias Arning said in an editorial in left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau (4/5):  "[The latest statements] question Secretary Powell's credibility.  The U.S. secretary of state shares this skepticism, which has now been shown to him, with the former Aznar government in Spain...that used the...UN Security Council for its interests, risking the loss of its own credibility and the damage of the UNSC's reputation.  This shows the significance which Powell and Aznar have attributed to this body, which others in the international community of nations still consider a moral but also political corrective.  The conservative Spanish leader footed the bill for his deceptions, an experience he has as an advantage over Powell."


"Become Honest"


Centrist Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin opined (4/4):  "At least one U.S. top politician is showing the greatness to concede that one of the key evidences of the past was none...but German delight at the confession is probably limited, since U.S. sources are now blaming the German Bundesnachrichtendienst for having supplied false information.  Such accusations can hardly been verified, but it is certain that working groups that were set upon in Washington systematically played up evidence against Iraq before they were passed on to the highest levels.  This is why Powell's step is an appeal to the whole U.S. administration to become honest.  This could be useful not only for the election campaign, but could strengthen again the allies' confidence in Washington."


"Powell Used As Front Man"


Center-right Nordkurier of Neubrandenburg (4/5):  "Colin Powell was used as a front man to change global opinion in favor of the campaign, and Powell probably allowed others to misuse him by believing in the infallibility of intelligence services.  Loyalty to the White House was at that time his prime goal.  His most recent statement, however, demonstrates critical self-reflection, and even allows to assume that he has scruples, a characteristic that is not frequently visible in Bush's surroundings.  This confession is not sensation, since it only completes the picture of a great Iraq lie that is linked to the name of the chief in the White House."


ITALY:  "Iraq, A Blood-Stained Post-War" 


Cesare De Carlo opined in conservative, top-circulation syndicate Il Resto del Carlino/La Nazione/Il Giorno (4/5): “Paul Bremer announced the nomination of a defense minister and a secret service chief.  Both should work to defeat the guerilla and terrorism in view of the transfer of powers to local authority....  But the Americans are the first ones to question whether the tormented post-war can effectively evolve toward normalization....  The Iraqi army and police are not capable of guaranteeing security. And without security any attempt at self-government will fail within a few weeks....  Therefore, Bremer’s announcement is nothing more than ‘wishful thinking’--not so much because of the endless attacks...but because of the strategy that guides them: to strike out against the coalition’s weak link, new Socialist Spain and to convince Zapatero not to give in to Washington and to not go back on its promise to withdraw from Iraq. It’s not a coincidence that the worst attack yesterday was against Spanish headquarters....  This confirms that Zapatero’s victory was dictated by anger and fear and not by voter disaffection. And it’s not an accident that this violence coincides with Bush’s troubles and with Powell self-criticism on WMD. Once again, al-Qaeda seems to obey a political command. It is improbable that it will be able to turn Iraq into another Taliban Afghanistan--at least not as long as Bush is in the White House.”


BELGIUM:  "Colin Powell Fights For Reputation" 


Foreign editor Evita Neefs held in Christian-Democrat De Standaard (4/2): "Powell's main 'most dramatic' evidence (for the war in Iraq) were the mobile--and easily concealable--labs for the production of biological weapons....  Doubts about those labs are not new, but Powell is the first member of the U.S. administration who openly admitted that the information was probably wrong....  Earlier the Secretary had admitted that there was disagreement among the intelligence experts, but it was the first time that he publicly criticized the spies.  Indeed, Powell's reputation is at stake--just like all the other parties'....  It was in many people's interest that the world believed that Saddam had WMD: exiles of all kinds who wanted Saddam to go; the Bush administration which also wanted Saddam to go and Saddam himself who wanted his neighbors and his own people to believe that he was dangerous and powerful.  According to David Kay, the intelligence services--which began to search for Saddam's weapons after the war--were so blinded by their belief that Saddam had bad intentions that they did not see the correct picture."


IRELAND:  "Powell Admits Intelligence On Labs Was 'Not Solid'"


Conor O'Clery wrote in the center-left Irish Times (4/5):  "The U.S. Secretary of State, Mr Colin Powell, told the UN Security Council last year, when making the case for war against Iraq, that four sources had given US intelligence ‘detailed and accurate’ descriptions of mobile labs to make biological weapons. Mr Powell has now conceded for the first time that the intelligence was not ‘solid'....  Mr Powell told U.S. reporters on a plane carrying him back to the US after a meeting of NATO in Brussels recently that he was given flawed data....  Mr Powell's presentation to the Security Council was the central element in his appeal for a resolution directly supporting a US-led invasion of Iraq. The US failed to convince council members but, given Mr Powell's prestige at home, it did much to bolster domestic support for war....  Mr Powell told reporters that he had pressed intelligence officials before addressing the Security Council to make sure their analysis from four alleged sources was correct."


PORTUGAL:  "Essay About Lies"


Influential moderate-left Público's deputy editor-in-chief Nuno Pacheco commented (4/5): "Colin Powell lied.  It's not an admission of guilt....  It is an admission of guilt.... It is not his fault, certainly, but they are still lies, at any rate.... One little detail:  When A spoke to B, he exaggerated, amplified, lied, told the story like he wanted it to be told.  B believed [the whole story].  The result is heartbreaking:  A toppled dictator...a ruined country, a white-hot fire of deaths and mutilations without optimistic scenarios for calming down the most reticent ones [enough] to accept the messianic salvations....  How will A be prevented from lying again, putting more guns and armies into action?  George W. Bush, President and candidate to the Presidency of the USA, should worry about answering.  Instead of this, in a video that is supposed to be funny, he looked for WMD under the carpets and behind the curtains of the Oval Office.  He didn't find any, as he didn't find them in Iraq.  Slanderous voices will say that it is for this very same reason that he stays in the White House: because he can't find the exit door." 


ROMANIA:  "False"


Madalina Mitan stated in financial-oriented Curentul (4/5):  “For the first time Colin Powell admited that the information that motivated him to support the invasion of Iraq might have been false....  This acknowledgement might represent a difficult moment for Bush administration, in a time when the incumbent White House leader is in full election campaign mode.”


TURKEY:  “Invasion Of Iraq Takes The World Backwards 100 Years”


Hakan Celik argued in mass-appeal sensational Posta (4/6):  “It is the anniversary of Iraq’s invasion, yet after more than a year there is zero gain with regard to stability.  Not only Iraq, but the whole Middle East region has fallen into a spiral of terrorism.  This situation can be interpreted as the world being sent backwards for 100 years....  All of the pretexts for invasion of Iraq have proven to be false.  However, the unstable atmosphere helped terrorist organizations a great deal in carrying out their bloody actions in the name of vengeance.  The terrorists are using religious motives to justify their actions, and the whole process is leading to a war between religions....  Recent clashes between American troops and the Shiites pose a serious threat for the future of Iraq.  President Bush might sincerely regret the invasion someday, but the fact of the matter is that the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq would not solve anything at this point.  The chaos in Iraq is growing by the day.”




SAUDI ARABIA:  "Worrisome Things"


Jedda's pro-government moderate Saudi Gazette declared (4/5):  "The extraordinary admission by...Colin Powell that evidence he submitted to the UN to justify war on Iraq may have been wrong is certain to bring about intensified scrutiny of the role played by the security services in the run up to the invasion of Iraq.  In February of last year, Powell told the UN Security Council that Iraq had developed mobile laboratories for making biological weapons....  This was a key claim used by US President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair to justify the invasion of Iraq....  The underlying argument was that if the international community was unwilling to act, faced with such clear evidence of Iraq's willingness to ignore UN resolutions, then this justified the United States and Britain acting unilaterally. It also bolstered the argument that those who refused to act under such circumstances (the French surrender monkeys) were nothing more than appeasers.  Secretary Powell has now conceded the information appears not to be...that solid....  He also indicated he had held discussions with the CIA about the subject without amplifying on the substance of those discussions. The claim about biological weapons, although it failed to persuade the Security Council to back the war, had a bearing on US and British public opinion. Powell's admissions really allow only two interpretations of events. One is that the intelligence information was wrong, which would be a commentary on the caliber of the security services.  The other is that the Bush administration chose to adopt a particular understanding of the information to justify a partisan political agenda. Recent claims made by former White House security coordinator Richard Clarke suggest the latter option....  The Security Council chose not to follow the logic of Powell's presentation about Saddam's mobile biological laboratories and it now appears it was right to have done so. It seems unlikely that the US security agencies will simply roll over and accept that they were at fault. With the presidential election due later this year stand by for further revelations."


JORDAN:  "Facing Up"        


A commentary in elite English-language Jordan Times noted (4/5):  "U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said it all when he admitted that the information he presented to the UN Security Council on Feb. 5, 2003, to justify the war against Iraq, was flawed.  During that internationally broadcasted meeting, Powell went to great pains to show that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that the photos of mobile biological weapons laboratories were genuine. Now we all know better....  Now, under pressure from Congress to come up with the truth, the Bush administration will have to admit that it nurtured an erroneous policy on Iraq, and by that remove the onus from the intelligence community, which has been taking a beating for doing its job.  It will have to face a majority of the American public who put its trust in the government, believing, once again, that it would do the right thing.  Setting the record straight would help resolve the Iraqi conflict too, if with the admission of having erred comes a genuine interest in seeing Iraq and its people on the path to peace, democracy and prosperity.  That the U.S. government admits that its justification for waging war on Iraq was not prompted by new information demonstrates how a democratic system of checks and balances works to the public's interest. It is perhaps just this sort of democratic principle that the Iraqi people themselves aspire to. The U.S. government must do some real soul-searching and take Iraq policy back to the route it promised to follow at the onset of the war.  We can expect even more 'revelations' about how the intelligence gathered on Iraq 'appears,' as Powell put it, no longer 'solid'? 


"Powell's Confession Or Pilate's Repudiation"


George Haddad maintained in center-left influential Arabic-language Al-Dustour (4/4):  "U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell admitted two days ago that his presentation to the UN in February 2003 in which he accused Iraq of possessing WMD was based on flawed intelligence information.  Powell found out that the evidence he presented was unreliable. He expressed his hope that the inquiry commission, which investigates the US intelligence authorities' information on the alleged WMD, will reach a conclusion on why the US intelligence agencies depended on unreliable information....  Like Roman procurator Pilate who sought to exonerate himself from the crucifixion of Christ, Powell justified his lies by saying he was told that his presentation was based on confirmed information.  As for his excuse that he went along with this fraud because he was not member of the intelligence community, it would have been acceptable, had he come to the State Department straight from the Nebraska fields or from Texas horse farms and had not served as national security adviser in the White House before he became the U.S. army's chief of staff.  As a matter of fact, this unexpected admission by Powell does not show a desire for expiation. Rather, it indicates a desire to continue the deception and a determination to practice more fabrication and falsification....  When a congressional commission asked him whether the Jewish gang that operates under the title 'neo conservatives' had a strong influence on the Bush administration, Powell replied by saying that the plan for the invasion of Iraq was laid down and endorsed by the Clinton administration....  Besides, during his discussions and rows with Secretary Rumsfeld and the Pentagon's Jewish gang, Powell knew very well from where the fabricated information came....  The Jewish gang badly needed someone who would present it with justifications and information, regardless of whether this information was true and reliable or false and fabricated.  Indeed the gang achieved its goal when it set up a special intelligence unit in the Pentagon, called the special policy office.  Douglas Feith, the son of a Jewish woman, was in charge of this office, which was tasked with fabricating information separate from the CIA....  Silence and pretense fitted the desire of the president who was obsessed with carrying out aggression against, and occupying, Iraq to appear as a war hero who achieved victory over terrorism.  With regard to Powell's belated admission, however, it is an opportunistic move, not a sign of courage or guiltlessness."


UAE: "Powell's Confession"


The independent English-language Gulf Today editorialized (4/5):  "Last year's presentation that U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell made in the United Nations on Iraq's alleged WMD to justify toppling Saddam Hussein was dramatically powerful and persuasive.  There were satellite imageries and recordings of intercepted conversations among Iraqi officials to back up claims Baghdad had posed a terror threat.  A year later the failure to find the WMD has not stirred the U.S. and its major ally Britain to make an apology to the Iraqi people and a misled world.  But as pressure mounts...Powell had to acknowledge that his prewar intelligence might have been flawed.  He admitted that intelligence went wrong over two Iraqi trailers, whose satellite photos were shown to support claims they were used for making WMD....  Even before bombing Afghanistan's Taliban regime and taking on the Al Qa'ida, Bush had kept Baghdad in his gunsight.  This reinforces claims of former U.S. counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke, who testified last week before the 9/11 congressional panel, that Bush did not consider Al Qa'ida an urgent threat despite repeated warnings.  These revelations have put Blair under renewed pressure....  With National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, whom Bush initially disallowed to appear before the Sept.11 panel, preparing to appear before it on Thursday, more disclosures might be on the way....  With the Anglo-American Iraq plan discredited, cracks in the war coalition are widening....  On Sunday Australia's opposition Labor Party asked PM John Howard to admit he had deceived the Australians on Iraq and apologise to the nation in light of Powell's confession.  Whatever fragile ground Washington built to justify the invasion is gone.  Even Rice's defence is unlikely to help cover the cracks in the coalition and the real intention to occupy Iraq:  Regional dominance."


"What Next After Admitting?"


Pro-government Arabic-language Al-Ittihad said (4/5):  "The most important issue about the admission by Colin Powell regarding Iraq's for the coalition to hasten the successful handing over of power to its owners [Iraqis] as scheduled on 30th June."




MALAYSIA:  "Not Amusing"


Government-influenced English language New Straits Times ran the following editorial (4/5):  "President George W. Bush made a public joke about not finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Now the joke's on him since his Secretary of State has admitted that evidence to justify the invasion of Iraq was based on information that 'appears not to be...that solid.'  Colin Powell went before the UN Security Council last February with data to show that Iraq had developed mobile laboratories for making biological weapons. He had then said evidence included first-hand accounts from four sources. Some UN weapon inspectors had doubts from the beginning. Former U.S. chief weapons inspector David Kay, among others, said most of the evidence came from an Iraqi defector, code-named 'Curveball', said to be connected to Ahmad Chalabi, a member of the Iraq Governing Council. American and British intelligence have conceded that misinformation provided by exiles had led to misjudgments about Iraq's weapons programmes.  Powell's admission and former counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke's allegations support the contention that Bush and his team made a decision to invade Iraq, then looked for evidence of WMD to justify it. Sir Christopher Meyer, former British Ambassador to Washington, reveals in a soon-to-be-published article that Bush and Tony Blair agreed to remove Saddam Hussein nine days after Sept 11, 2001. Bush, however, is unlikely to agree that the war on terror had given him a pretext for military adventurism. He would be content to spin the same old line that Iraq was invaded to destroy the non-existent WMD, liberate the Iraqi people, and make the world safe for democracy to enhance his chances for re-election."


INDIA:  "Selective Democracy In Iraq" 


The nationalist Hindustan Times contended (4/7):  "The Iraq saga is dealing U.S. prestige a heavy blow. Now even Secretary of State Colin Powell is saying that the intelligence assessments that led up to the war were bogus. His reasons may have to do with internal US politics.   But the larger issue is the social and political mess created by the invasion, the economic breakdown and the collapse of the country's security system. In other words, America has done a terrible job running Iraq for a year.  Much of this is becoming apparent as Washington plans to hand back Iraq its sovereignty by June 30....  While debate is rife about procedures to be followed for the handover, a new bush-fire has been lit. The U.S. forces have declared war on Moqtada al-Sadr....  The moderate sections of the majority Shia community led by the venerable Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, with whom the mode of U.S. withdrawal was being discussed, have been rendered mere spectators....  The trouble with al-Sadr started when the Americans closed down his newspaper last week--not a very democratic act when the professed U.S. goal is to bring democracy to Iraq. But an armed Shia rebellion has long been brewing. The Sunnis, the keenest defenders of Saddam Hussein, in Iraq's central parts are already in revolt. What a shambles on the eve of the supposed restoration of Iraqi sovereignty."


"Beyond Belief"


The Calcutta-based independent Telegraph opined (4/5):  "There are situations when being speechless is the most serious of condemnations.   Mr Colin Powell's announcement that the intelligence on Iraq's accumulation of WMD was flawed is one such instance.  The acknowledgement can only leave everybody aghast.   Whether Mr Powell...and his president, Mr George W. Bush, likes it or not, this admission on Mr Powell's part makes the U.S. a naked aggressor.  The central public plank of the war that the US declared on Iraq was 'the fact' that Mr Saddam Hussein had been building up an arsenal of WMD.  That fact has now been publicly acknowledged to be fiction.   No such arsenal has been found. Mr Bush thus destroyed Iraq on flimsy and unsubstantiated--some might even say manufactured--evidence. Mr Powell made his presentation to the UN on the basis of evidence given to him by the CIA.  He is now trying to distance himself from that evidence by saying that at that point in time, the evidence seemed convincing....  This is disingenuous, since Mr Powell cannot deny responsibility for the evidence that he brought into the public domain by presenting it to the UN.  He could not have been unaware that on this evidence depended the destruction of Iraq and thousands of lives.  Since the emergence of a unipolar world and the unofficial coronation of the U.S. as the world's sheriff, the U.S. has tried to claim for itself a moral high ground.  It has projected itself as standing for a new world-order, which is different from the one represented by Mr Hussein and Mr Osama bin Laden.  It has advocated a world free from terror and totalitarianism.   But the U.S. action in Iraq and the fact that it was bereft of any reason have only revealed the hollowness of its own claims.  The U.S. rode roughshod over all democratic opinion, including that of the UN, against the invasion and proceeded to unleash a reign of terror against the people of Iraq.  'Might is right' cannot be the basis of a new world-order, as the logical extension of that is a descent into a state of nature.  It has been the argument of some that the U.S. is actually involved in the 21st-century version of the great game in west Asia.  This might well turn out to be true once the real reasons for the invasion are unveiled."


PAKISTAN:  “Admittance Of Guilt By U.S. Secretary Of State”


An editorial in the Karachi-based, right-wing, pro-Islamic unity Urdu Jasarat (4/5): "The U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell has admitted that he had provided faulty information to the UN regarding Iraq’s biological and chemical arsenal....  President Bush who is confronting an internal resistance wants to clear his record before the impending presidential elections.  That’s the reason why one admission after the other is coming to the fore from his camp.  But the point is that mere admission of guilt is not enough.  The need is to lodge a war crime case against the entire U.S. leadership and they be asked to pay ransom for ransacking Iraq."


"Colin Powell's Admission"


Populist Urdu-language Khabrain declared (4/5):  "U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell has admitted that he had provided wrong information to UN regarding Iraq chemical and biological weapons mobile laboratories....  After this admission the U.S. administration is not left with any justification to keep its control over Iraq.  Retreat would be a difficult preposition for America.  The other honorable way of getting out of Iraq is that America should immediately hold elections in Iraq and hand over governance to the elected representatives of the people of Iraq."


"Unjustifiable Attack On Iraq: Colin Powell's Open Admission"


Center-right Urdu-language Pakistan held (4/5):  "It is surprising that while America admits having attacked Iraq without justification, it goes on with the efforts to strengthen its hold over the country....  America is interested only in the oil of Iraq, and its geo-strategic importance, and a guarantee for the protection of Israeli frontiers.  However, America does not have the strength of purpose as it had one year ago....  Sooner or later America would have to shun its aggression and let the world become fit for human habitation."


"In Order To Justify Iraq War Wrong Report Was Presented Before UN: Powell"


Independent Urdu-language Din judged (4/4):  "U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell has admitted the report he had presented before the UN for justifying war on Iraq was based on wrong and imperfect details.  Speaking with newsmen while flying from Brussels to Washington, he said that the dramatic part of his report in UN on mobile chemical and biological weapons laboratories in Iraq was based on unreliable information." 


"Data Given to UN Was Not Solid, Admits Powell"


Karachi-based center-left national English-language Dawn stated (4/4):  "U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledged on Friday that information he gave the UN on Iraq's mobile biological weapons laboratories to justify last year's invasion did not appear 'solid' any longer.   Before the invasion, Mr. Powell presented the UN with data proclaiming to prove that Iraq was engaged in the development of WMD."



Commentary from ...
Middle East
East Asia
South Asia
Western Hemisphere

This site is produced and maintained by the U.S. Department of State. Links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.

Back To Top

blue rule
IIP Home  |  Issue Focus Home