• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

Article

An Unnecessary War


The official end to the U.S. search for weapons in Iraq confirms what most observers had known for over a year and what UN inspections indicated before the war: Iraq did not have any significant amount of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons or long-range missiles. Some old weapons produced before the 1991 war may still be found, but it is clear that the main justification for launching the 2003 invasion of Iraq was not true. As a Carnegie study concluded one year ago, administration officials systematically misled the American people as to the nature of the threat and the need for military action.

Saddam Hussein, who had ruled the nation in a brutal dictatorship since 1979, had actively pursued such programs and had produced thousands of tons of chemical and biological weapon agents during the 1980s. The programs were ended and the stockpiles destroyed by the 1991 Gulf War and United Nations disarmament activities that followed.

(Continue)


Link Copied
By Joseph Cirincione
Published on Jan 13, 2005
Program mobile hero image

Program

Nuclear Policy

The Nuclear Policy Program aims to reduce the risk of nuclear war. Our experts diagnose acute risks stemming from technical and geopolitical developments, generate pragmatic solutions, and use our global network to advance risk-reduction policies. Our work covers deterrence, disarmament, arms control, nonproliferation, and nuclear energy.

Learn More

January 13, 2005

The official end to the U.S. search for weapons in Iraq confirms what most observers had known for over a year and what UN inspections indicated before the war: Iraq did not have any significant amount of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons or long-range missiles. Some old weapons produced before the 1991 war may still be found, but it is clear that the main justification for launching the 2003 invasion of Iraq was not true. As a Carnegie study concluded one year ago, administration officials systematically misled the American people as to the nature of the threat and the need for military action.

Saddam Hussein, who had ruled the nation in a brutal dictatorship since 1979, had actively pursued such programs and had produced thousands of tons of chemical and biological weapon agents during the 1980s. The programs were ended and the stockpiles destroyed by the 1991 Gulf War and United Nations disarmament activities that followed.

Iraq’s failure to cooperate fully with UN verification measures led to the withdrawal of inspectors and the bombing of some Iraqi facilities in December 1998. After four years of frustrated attempts to continue their inventory and accounting of Iraq’s past and suspected programs, United Nations inspectors returned to Iraq in November 2002. In March 2003, the inspections ended when the United States led a coalition of countries to invade Iraq and topple Hussein’s regime. The 2003 war was the world’s first non-proliferation war--a war based primarily on the desire to prevent a nation from obtaining, using or transferring nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

The UN inspections and the subsequent weapons hunt by U.S. forces after the war yielded three key conclusions:

1. There is no evidence of significant Iraqi nuclear, chemical or biological weapon programs or stockpiles created after the 1991 Gulf War, or any Scud missiles, warheads or unmanned aerial vehicles designed to deliver such weapons. The nuclear, chemical, and biological programs ended between 1991 and 1996, while the missile program continued, though Iraq failed to develop any missiles capable of travelling over 200 kilometers.

2. UN sanctions and inspections were highly effective in disarming Iraq after the 1991 War. Two special units dealt with the biological, chemical and missile programs: the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM, 1991-1999) and the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC, 1999-2003). The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) supervised the nuclear disarmament and verification efforts.

3. In the year prior to the 2003 war, U.S. and British officials grievously misrepresented Iraq’s weapon capabilities. Senior officials in the U.S., UK and some other nations were convinced of the need to eliminate the Hussein regime and believed nonproliferation and other regional objectives could be reliably accomplished through military means.

It is clear now--and was to many before the war--that Saddam Hussein did not represent an urgent threat to the United States. The cost and consequences of this unnecessary war are still growing.


Related Links:

WMD in Iraq: Evidence and Implications, Carnegie study by Joseph Cirincione, Jessica T. Mathews and George Perkovich, January 2004.

About the Author

Joseph Cirincione

Former Senior Associate, Director for NonProliferation

    Recent Work

  • Report
    Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security<br>With 2007 Report Card on Progress
      • +2

      George Perkovich, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, Joseph Cirincione, …

  • Article
    The End of Neoconservatism

      Joseph Cirincione

Joseph Cirincione
Former Senior Associate, Director for NonProliferation
Joseph Cirincione
United StatesIraqNuclear Energy

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Realism and the Lebanon-Israel Talks

    Beirut’s desire to break free from Iranian hegemony may push it into a situation where it has to accept Israel’s hegemony.  

      Michael Young

  • Fire damage is pictures as US President Joe Biden (out of frame) visits to an area devastated by wildfires in Lahaina, Hawaii on August 21, 2023.
    Article
    The United States Has an Internal Displacement Problem

    By reorganizing federal disaster policy around the rights of displaced people, the United States could unlock additional federal resources, accelerate the rebuilding of lives and livelihoods, and reduce suffering and economic disruption.

      • Kayly Ober

      Kayly Ober

  • flood wall
    Commentary
    Emissary
    BRIC Is Critical for U.S. National Security. After a Yearlong Legal Battle, It’s Back.

    Its reinstatement should be celebrated, but it retains some major shortcomings.

      Leonardo Martinez-Diaz

  • Man standing next to a pile of burned cars
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Myriad Problems With the Iran Ceasefire

    Four Middle East experts analyze the region’s reactions and next steps.

      • Andrew Leber
      • Eric Lob
      • +1

      Amr Hamzawy, Andrew Leber, Eric Lob, …

  •  A machine gun of a Houthi soldier mounted on a police vehicle next to a billboard depicting the U.S. president Donald Trump and Mohammed Bin Salman, the Crown Prince and Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia, during a protest staged to show support to Iran against the U.S.-Israel war on March 27, 2026 in Sana'a, Yemen.
    Collection
    The Iran War’s Global Reach

    As the war between the United States, Israel, and Iran continues, Carnegie scholars contribute cutting-edge analysis on the events of the war and their wide-reaching implications. From the impact on Iran and its immediate neighbors to the responses from Gulf states to fuel and fertilizer shortages caused by the effective shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, the war is reshaping Middle East alliances and creating shockwaves around the world. Carnegie experts analyze it all.

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.