F. Other Possible Missions for the UAVs
(U) The majority IC position in the NIE did not discuss any possible missions for Iraq's UAVs, other than CBW delivery. The United States Air Force (USAF), however, assessed that the UAVs were not being developed to deliver BW and their footnote outlined another possible purpose. The USAF said,
Iraq is developing UAVs primarily for reconnaissance rather than delivery platforms for CBW agents. The capabilities and missions of Iraq's new UAV remains undetermined, but in this view its small size strongly suggests a primary role of reconnaissance. CBW delivery is an inherent capability of UAVs but probably is not the impetus for Iraq's recent UAV programs.
( )The USAF based this assessment on technical analysis that the small UAVs were too small to be effective CBW delivery vehicles, USAF and the National Air Intelligence Center (NAIC) analysts also told Committee staff that they did not believe the intelligence reporting demonstrated any link between the small UAVs and a BW delivery mission, but did show other possible missions for the UAVs.
(U) At least eleven HUMINT reports provided to the Committee suggested that both the L-29s and the small UAVs had missions that were unrelated to BW delivery. Three reports suggested that the UAVs were intended to attack U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf, but did not mention how attacks would have been conducted. Four reports suggested the UAVs were intended to be used as cruise missiles to replace Iraq's prohibited surface to surface missiles and two reports indicated that the purpose of the UAVs was reconnaissance. One report suggested that UAVs were being produced for air defense training and another report suggested that the UAVs were being used for both surveillance and air defense training.
( )The IC also provided at least eight reports which showed that Iraq was trying to procure DELETED and technical equipment. One HUMINT report: mentioned that Ira had not decided on a supplier for, DELETED for the UAV, and DELETED reports discussed Iraqi attempts to procure several items including equipment that could be used in an airborne surveillance system. The USAF told Committee staff that Iraq's interest in acquiring this equipment suggested that the UAVs were intended to be used for reconnaissance, but the CIA told Committee staff that technical equipment could also be used for targeting purposes in UAVs intended for BW delivery.
(U) While the USAF was the only agency to discuss a potential mission for the UAVs other than CBW delivery, analysts from other agencies told Committee staff that they also believed Iraq's UAVs were being developed for missions other than CBW. The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) Iraq UAV analyst told Committee staff that he agreed with the USAF's footnote that the small UAVs could be used for BW delivery, but were primarily intended for other missions. When asked why he did not join the footnote, the analyst said, "its probably an example of the speed of the [NIE] process... And [the Air Force] had footnoted it. So it was out there."
(U) DIA analysts told Committee staff that they believed Iraq's UAVs had missions other than CBW delivery and agreed with the USAF that the small UAVs were primarily being developed for reconnaissance. The DIA, however, told Committee staff that they did not join the USAF footnote in the NIE because the body of the NIE never said that the small UAVs were intended primarily to deliver BW. The body of the NIE said only that the IC was concerned about Iraq's development of UAVs because Iraq had "configured small UAVs" in the past for biological agent delivery. The DIA agreed with the statements in the body of the NIE and, therefore, believed a footnote would have been unnecessary.
(U) CIA analysts told Committee staff they also believed that the UAVs had missions other than CBW delivery. One CIA UAV analyst told Committee staff that, "some of Iraq's UAVs were in fact developed for reconnaissance and as aerial targets," and another analyst said, "our position was not that every single UAV the Iraqis were producing was for CBW delivery." In line with this position, a 2001 intelligence assessment from the Director of Central Intelligence's (DCI) Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation and Arms Control Center (WINPAC) titled Iraq's L-29: A Biological and Chemical Warfare Challenge to US Forces did include discussion of other possible missions for the L-29 to include conventional weapons delivery, operation as an electronic intelligence (FLINT) platform, and reconnaissance missions. CIA analysts told Committee staff that "in retrospect" they did not believe that CIA's assessments about the UAVs were accurately represented because the NIE did not address the reconnaissance mission.
(U) In a written response to a question from the Committee about the IC's analysis of Iraq's UAVs, the CIA told the Committee that, "the role of UAVs as CBW delivery systems was emphasized over their role as reconnaissance vehicles and aerial targets in the NIE assessment, as the focus of the NIE was WMD delivery systems and not the Iraqi UAV program as a whole. We assessed that most Iraqi UAVs were designed as aerial targets and for reconnaissance missions, but those roles fell outside the scope of the Iraq WMD NIE."
( )Of note, in November 2002, the NIC produced an NIE on Nontraditional Threats to the U.S. Homeland Through 2007, which did discuss other possible missions for the UAVs, although Iraqi UAVs also were not the primary focus of this intelligence assessment. The NIE said that Iraq may be modifying UAVs to deliver CBW agents, but said "[technical equipment] and other equipment being sought for this program will enable the UAVs to be employed for reconnaissance and, if the UAV is to be used as a CBW delivery vehicle, for targeting." The US AF also included a footnote in this NIE, and this time was joined by the DIA, because the body of this NIE assessed that the UAVs may be being modified for CBW delivery. The footnote said the DIA, the USAF and the Army agreed that
"BW delivery is an inherent capability of most UAVs and that Iraq may choose to exploit this capability, but they note that the evidence is unconfirmed and is not sufficiently compelling to indicate the Iraqis have done so. There is information, however, on procurements that indicate a reconnaissance mission for the UAV program is more likely."
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
