Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
586.  On 20 October, Lt Gen McColl sent the Hauldown Report of his tour in Iraq.533
He wrote:
“Despite their limited numbers and state of training, ISF are even now capable of
strategically significant impact. Their deployment has an effect that coalition troops
cannot achieve … They are therefore in great demand and, there is a risk … that
their premature committal to operations, which are still beyond their capacity, could
irreparably dent their confidence. The risk is exacerbated by the understandable
impatience of the IIG, supported to some extent in both Washington and London …
“The critical path for the IPS will be meeting the sheer scale of the equipping and
training requirement, as well as the continued identification of tough committed
police chiefs. There are grounds for optimism, but no police force could operate in
the current levels of violence without relying on the support of the Army, including the
ING, to provide a secure framework and surge capability …
“The frustration that the UK has felt at the slow and chequered progress of ISF
generation has been understandable. Our contribution outside MND(SE) has,
however been limited (aside from helpful training team activity) to advice to US
colleagues who are themselves frustrated and doing all they can to translate the
$5 billion they are investing into security capability, whilst reconciling the somewhat
turbulent aspirations of the IIG. Within MND(SE) the flow of equipment to ING and
IPS from US suppliers has been painfully slow, a problem compounded by the
prioritisation of issue based on the prevailing security situation across the country.
There has recently been an initiative, which has yet to deliver effect that would allow
UK resources to support the equipping of the ISF within the UK area; this is to be
welcomed and is perhaps overdue.”
587.  On putting the right structures in place, Lt Gen McColl referenced the need to put
particular emphasis on developing the MOI “staff planning capability”, which remained
“the most serious concern”.
588.  On 27 October, a Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) Assessment reported that
the capability of the ISF was “growing” but that their effectiveness remained “patchy”.534
It stated:
“The more reliable and better trained elements are in short supply and limit the
current ability of the IIG to conduct more than one or two concurrent operations.
The ISF will improve slowly up to the elections and their capability is planned to
build significantly in the early part of 2005. But we judge that they will not be able
to handle significant security responsibilities unaided until the middle of 2005 at the
earliest. The nascent Iraqi intelligence service (INIS) is also under severe pressure
and continues to suffer from assassinations and penetration.”
533  Report McColl to CDS and CJO, 20 October 2004, ‘SBMR‑I Hauldown report – Lt Gen McColl’.
534  JIC Assessment, 27 October 2004, ‘Iraq: A Long‑Term Insurgency Problem’.
184
Previous page | Contents | Next page