When WMD isn’t WMD

21 October 2005, 1922 EDT

Brad DeLong criticizes Dan Drezner thusly,

danieldrezner.com :: Daniel W. Drezner :: Blog: [Colonel Larry] Wilkerson also points out, however, that there was a stronger pre-war consensus on Iraqi WMD intellgence than many want to believe…

“WMD” means chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. Nearly everybody in the intelligence community was confident that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons. But there was no consensus that Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons, or an ongoing nuclear weapons program–as indeed he did not.

Nukes are the big deal. Nukes can justify an invasion. Chemical weapons–not

A more precise response is that most “people who should know” thought that Hussein had some biological and chemical agents, but not necessarily weapons of mass destruction.

For those of you who just asked “what?” or merely grunted “hunh?”: the distinction isn’t difficult to understand and is pretty important for anyone who still cares about ~~how~~ whether or not the administration misled the United States into the war.

One can have biological or chemical weapons without having WMD. Take anthrax, for example. A state can have lots and lots of anthrax. If it isn’t weapons-grade and/or the state lacks an effective delivery system, though, it doesn’t constitute a WMD. As one of my colleagues put it (I paraphrase): “the bioweapons capability we assumed Hussein had would be very deadly if you lined up lots and lots of people in the desert and injected each of them with a syringe.”

Filed as: Iraq and WMD

Dan Nexon

Daniel H. Nexon is a Professor at Georgetown University, with a joint appointment in the Department of Government and the School of Foreign Service. His academic work focuses on international-relations theory, power politics, empires and hegemony, and international order. He has also written on the relationship between popular culture and world politics.

He has held fellowships at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation and at the Ohio State University's Mershon Center for International Studies. During 2009-2010 he worked in the U.S. Department of Defense as a Council on Foreign Relations International Affairs Fellow. He was the lead editor of International Studies Quarterly from 2014-2018.

He is the author of The Struggle for Power in Early Modern Europe: Religious Conflict, Dynastic Empires, and International Change (Princeton University Press, 2009), which won the International Security Studies Section (ISSS) Best Book Award for 2010, and co-author of Exit from Hegemony: The Unraveling of the American Global Order (Oxford University Press, 2020). His articles have appeared in a lot of places. He is the founder of the The Duck of Minerva, and also blogs at Lawyers, Guns and Money.