Did They?
by digby
Atrios links to this from Evan Bayh:
Bayh calmly answered that “I wouldn’t cast the same vote today as I did then.” He noted that “the French believed that (there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq), the Germans believed that, the Russians believed that, everybody believed he [Saddam Hussein] had weapons of mass destruction.”
Yes, we’ve heard that. Apparently, it’s supposed to excuse the fact that the administration ignored its own government, but whatever. This trope about France, Russia and Germany is dragged out with such frequency it’s become a matter of faith. But is it true?
I honestly don’t know. There are reports on the internet that France did not believe it. The Guardian published a story in the fall of 2002 featuring Pootie-Poot saying this:
Specifically targeting the CIA report, Putin said, “Fears are one thing, hard facts are another.” He goes on to say, “Russia does not have in its possession any trustworthy data that supports the existence of nuclear weapons or any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we have not received any such information from our partners yet. This fact has also been supported by the information sent by the CIA to the US Congress.”
Putin, like everyone else, then endorsed sending the inspectors back in for obvious reasons — to prove the case one way or the other. But the only thing I’ve ever seen that indicated the French and the Germans had independent knowledge of what has turned out to be a non-existent arsenal, came from David Kay, who testified to that effect before congress. But I suspect that to the extent they might have said they believed it, it was because we told them we had evidence, not that they had independently verified it. I just have a sneaking suspicion that we would have heard what it was by now.
You’ll recall that the security council in the run up to the war was in a frenzy of activity trying to stop this stupid war. The resolution to allow inspectors back in was not based upon a set of facts that that everyone agreed to. It was based upon a desire to stop the US from plunging headlong into war. And the history of that rush to war shows this:
The United States told UN arms inspectors to pack their bags and leave Iraq, with last-ditch talks at the United Nations Security Council looking unlikely to break a diplomatic deadlock amid unswerving French and Russian opposition to war.
The Security Council was set to meet in what US President George Bush said would be “a moment of truth for the world”, while the United States and Britain told their nationals to leave Kuwait immediately, with London warning of the threat of chemical and biological attack from neighbouring Iraq.
With war looking increasingly imminent – British commentators have spoken of a 24-hour pause for weapons inspectors, diplomats and others to leave Iraq before war begins – Security Council members China, Russia, France and Germany all appealed for Bush to give diplomacy more time.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said the United States would be making a mistake with the most serious consequences if it went to war without UN backing, in his first direct comments on the Iraq crisis for weeks, Interfax news agency reported.
[…]
Yesterday, he said, “is the day that we will determine whether or not diplomacy can work”, adding that Saddam would have to disarm or would be disarmed by force.
Asked whether that meant the diplomatic window would now close for a vote on a draft UN resolution brought by the US, Britain and Spain that is widely seen as paving the way for war, he replied: “That’s what I’m saying.”
Baghdad responded that Washington and London had “drowned the world with lies”.
France, whose opposition to the resolution has led to a diplomatic deadlock at the UN, insisted it would veto the resolution, despite appeals from Mr Bush and Mr Blair for international unity.
“France cannot accept the resolution on the table that lays down an ultimatum,” Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin told Europe 1 radio, reiterating a pledge by President Jacques Chirac to torpedo the motion.
Moscow added its opposition, saying there was “no chance” of the Security Council approving the resolution, Interfax reported.
“We do not believe that any new resolutions are necessary,” said Deputy Foreign Minister Yury Fedotov.
In Beijing, Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing insisted the issue should be solved through dialogue within the United Nations, while German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder rejected the rush to war and said UN weapons inspections in Iraq were proving effective.
With Paris and Moscow lining up to veto the resolution, speculation rose that London and Washington would withdraw the text and launch strikes.
[…]
Mr Blair had given Paris until yesterday to change its mind, saying: “People have got to decide whether they are going to allow any second resolution (on Iraq) to have teeth, to make it clear that there is a real ultimatum in it.
“If their positions do not change … it is very difficult to see how you can move this diplomatic process forward,” he said. “This is the impasse.”
A government official said the ball was in France’s and Russia’s court: “It’s a decision for France and Russia whether they would sign up to an ultimatum.”
None of that proves that France, Germany and Russia believed that Iraq had WMD. But let’s not pretend that they had jumped on the bandwagon with our plans either. If they “knew” independently that Saddam had WMD, they certainly didn’t seem to think it required an invasion. You’d think that fact would have given Evan and his buds in the congress some pause at the time. You’d certainly think it would embarrass the shit out of them now.
.