Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
Responsibility for the security ministries moves to MNSTC‑I
A report to Congress on 13 October 2005 stated that the US Embassy Iraq and MNF‑I had
“recently agreed” to assign responsibility for the Iraqi security ministries’ development to
MNSTC‑I with effect from 1 October 2005.711
A paper produced by the MOD for DOP(I) on 15 November stated:
“MNSTC‑I has overall responsibility for providing assistance … to the IG [Iraqi
Government] in the development of the MOD and MOI. This helps to generate some
short‑term capacity assistance; however, the UK must use its senior representation
within this Command to help the Iraqis build indigenous capacity within the security
sector. This can be achieved through full manning of agreed liaison posts throughout
the IG and recognising the need for local participation and ownership at all stages of
the capacity‑building project.”712
An eGram from Baghdad on 2 November reported that merging efforts on MOI
reform “should combine IRMO civilian expertise with MNSTC‑I military resources and
manpower”.713 The “bedding‑in process [was] still under way” and “some tension between
the civilian element and the military” remained.
In his weekly report of 1 January 2006, DCC Smith stated that military personnel were
gradually replacing police officers in key CPATT roles.714 He cited the upcoming vacancy for
a Senior IPLO Advisor post at CPATT as “a further opportunity for Senior UK influence” and
that if the UK was to embed officers into CPATT, it was “essential” that it include a senior
strategic position or the UK would “simply be providing more ‘indians’”. DCC Smith was “not
convinced” that the US would allow the post to be taken by a “non‑American”. He described
“a weakening morale among IPLO colleagues and … increased military encroachment”.
A report to Congress on 26 May reported that MNSTC‑I had awarded a contract to provide
civilian experts to help build organisational capacity by working alongside Iraqi officials in
the IMOD and MOI in February that year.715
An eGram was sent from Baghdad on 8 September about the development of the MOI
and progress of the GCPP‑funded project (as described earlier in this Section).716 It said
that a new structure for the MOI was “now more or less in place”, although there were still
insufficient systems in place to reduce corruption and staff had difficulties delegating tasks
because they lacked the understanding about how responsibility should be matched with
accountability and authority.
The eGram acknowledged that capacity‑building was a long‑term process but that
“measurable progress” had been made. Collaboration with MNSTC‑I had been “very
good” and represented “an example of how civilian (DFID) and military (MNSTC‑I) efforts
can effectively complement each other”.
711  Report to Congress, 13 October 2005, Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq.
712  Paper MOD, 11 November 2005, ‘Strategy for the UK’s Contribution to Iraq Security’.
713  eGram 17261/05 Baghdad to FCO, 2 November 2005, ‘Iraq: Ministry of the Interior and Policing’.
714  Minute Smith, 1 January 2006, ‘UK Chief Police Advisor – Iraq: Weekly Report: Week Ending Sunday
1st Jan 2006’.
715  Report to Congress, 26 May 2006, Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq.
716  eGram 39420/06 Baghdad to FCO, 8 September 2006, ‘Iraq: Institutional Development in the Ministry
of Interior’.
228
Previous page | Contents | Next page