INSTANT ANALYSIS

Chief Iraqi weapons inspector Charles Duelfer will present the findings of the Iraq Survey Group later to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

He's expected to say that the ISG has found no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons in Iraq.

On the surface, Duelfer's conclusion would seem to undermine a central rationale of Washington and London's strategy to remove Saddam Hussein: that Saddam's Iraqi government had weapons of mass destruction (indeed, that's the top line that the AP is going with.)

However, the White House and Downing Street will spin the ISG report into a clear justification for invading Iraq by focusing on a number of findings:

1) That Saddam had never abandoned his intention to acquire chemical weapons.
2) That he was in multiple breach of UN resolutions.
3) That he had an aggressive strategy to subvert the UN's oil-for-food programme.

I understand that the ISG report will suggest that Saddam planned to resume his WMD programme once international sanctions were lifted.

It will point to evidence of deception by the Iraqi regime.

It will suggest that Saddam retained an ability to develop chemical weapons and long-range missile systems.

Once the ISG report is published, Washington and London's defence of the Iraq War will focus squarely on capability and intent.

British and American administration officials will say that although no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons were found Iraq, the ISG has found overwhelming evidence that, left unchecked, Saddam Hussein would have attempted to obtain them.