Saddam Hussein is ready to use his chemical and biological weapons as a last resort to stop American and British forces from toppling his regime, a leading think-tank said yesterday.
Faced with the threat of invasion, the Iraqi dictator has probably already issued orders for the production of his weapons of mass destruction to be stepped up and has deployed them to military units defending Baghdad.
However, the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies said that for America to refrain from taking military action could make matters only worse.
Unless Saddam was stopped, he would build up his armoury of fearsome weapons and would ultimately succeed in developing a nuclear weapon, it said.
Summing up the institute's new assessment of Iraq's weapons programme, John Chipman, director of the IISS, said: "Either course of action carries risks. Wait and the threat will grow; strike and the threat may be used."
Iraq's quest for weapons of mass destruction "is self-evidently the core objective of the regime, for it has sacrificed all other domestic and foreign policy goals to this singular aim".
The report from the IISS, one of the world's leading strategic studies think-tanks, amounts to an updated summary of the reams of publicly available information on Iraq's weapons programmes.
Its conclusions are similar to those reached by the United Nations Special Commission charged with ridding Iraq of chemical and biological weapons and ballistic missiles; the International Atomic Energy Commission, which dealt with Iraq's nuclear programme; and the most recent estimates by the US Department of Defence and the CIA.
In addition, IISS experts have made informed guesses of what further progress Saddam might have made in developing his weapons since the departure of UN weapons inspectors in 1998, and added a political perspective of his motives and possible tactics.
The report was welcomed by Downing Street, but there were calls for the Government's own long-awaited dossier, to be released in the coming weeks, to offer more up-to-date evidence.
"This report is a very good document, the best compilation of the facts I have seen," said Paul Beaver, an analyst at Jane's Defence Weekly. "But there's nothing new here, no killer fact that makes me believe that we should go to war tomorrow."
According to the IISS, Iraq's weapons programme has been much reduced by the 1991 Gulf war, the work of weapons inspectors, the bombing campaign during Desert Fox in 1998 and the impact of economic sanctions and surveillance by Western intelligence agencies.
Nevertheless, Iraq could develop a nuclear bomb within months if it could steal or buy weapons-grade fissile material from abroad.
More probably, Iraq was still several years away from being able to enrich enough uranium on its own to build a nuclear bomb.
Similarly, Iraq was, in all likelihood, continuing to develop its chemical and biological weapons and the means of delivering them, such as missiles and drones. It might be making biological weapons in mobile laboratories hidden in refrigerated lorries.
Nevertheless, Iraq's ability to inflict mass casualties - either through chemical or biological weapons, or a radiological "dirty" bomb - is probably limited, not least because its missile warheads were primitive and its aircraft were vulnerable to being shot down.
The IISS warns that delaying international action, be it a military attack or restoring effective UN inspections, will make it only more difficult to contain Iraq in future.
"In the present situation Saddam Hussein can slowly continue to rebuild his WMD [weapons of mass destruction] and missile capabilities, though hampered by technical problems, sanctions and the threat of air strikes against covert facilities," said the report's conclusion.
"If sanctions were lifted, Iraq's ability to reconstitute its capabilities would accelerate. . . In either case - whether sooner or later - it seems likely that the current Iraqi regime will eventually achieve its objectives.
"Should Iraq acquire nuclear weapons and more effective delivery means, it will greatly limit options for checking potential Iraqi threats to its neighbours and certainly stimulate further proliferation in the region."
The report notes that on the eve of the 1991 Gulf war, Saddam distributed chemical and biological warheads to military units, with orders to use them as weapons of last resort should US-led forces try to advance on Baghdad.
Western intelligence agencies found out about Iraq's decision to distribute munitions filled with biological weapons only in 1995. Saddam is likely to be taking similar action now in the face of America's declared aim of bringing down the regime.
The IISS said it was likely that some field commanders would refuse orders to use the weapons in the hope of improving their standing with a post-Saddam regime. But US and British forces nevertheless faced a real threat.
"It seems unlikely, however, that all use of CBW [chemical and biological weapons] can be avoided. Some loyal units are likely to use tactical CBW munitions (rockets and artillery shells) against US forces in the field, even though the effectiveness of these attacks will probably be limited," the report said.
"Airborne or helicopter-borne sprayers could in theory pose a greater threat to US forces, but CBW protective measures would probably prevent serious casualties."
Iraq probably retains a small number of ballistic missiles, and the IISS estimates that a successful missile attack against cities in Israel, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia or Turkey, could result in hundreds or even thousands of deaths. An aircraft with spray devices, if it could penetrate air defences, would be much deadlier.
"With nothing to lose, Baghdad may also seek to mount CBW attacks with special forces and sympathetic terrorist groups in the US and allied countries," the report said.
"A difficult question to answer is the willingness of military officers and security officials to follow President Saddam Hussein down a suicide path and the degree to which, conversely, an internal military coup becomes more likely if the regime appears doomed."
