Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
An assessment of the Iraqi Security Forces
On 28 September 2005, the JIC assessed the security situation in the South.889 On the
ISF and local governance, it stated:
“This fragility of local governance is not new and is mirrored to a greater or lesser
degree across the country. We have previously judged the Iraqi security forces
(ISF) in the South to be brittle, largely untested and under the influence of political
and tribal factions; and noted that the relationship between regional and national
government is tenuous. The effectiveness of the police in particular has been a
persistent concern. Policemen have been implicated in the recent murder of two
journalists working for US papers; intelligence has indicated serious abuse of
prisoners on political and sectarian grounds; and […] some police were conducting
assassinations on behalf of political militias […] The scale of divided loyalty within
the police, and the ISF more generally, is difficult to quantify. Most members of the
ISF undoubtedly have allegiance to political factions or tribes: under pressure their
reliability will be doubtful. We judge that a significant number actively colludes with
Shia extremist militias.”
943.  The Iraqi and UK authorities in Basra conducted separate investigations into the
Jameat incident.890 Mr Patey met Prime Minister Ja’afari to discuss the Iraqi report
on 30 September. The Iraqi investigation found faults on both sides but attributed
“80 percent of the blame … to the British”, a position that was refuted by Mr Patey. When
pressed on the need to take action against the militia influence at the Jameat Police
Station, Mr Ja’afari claimed that the Transitional Administrative Law (TAL) gave central
government very little control over the local police. Mr Patey reminded Mr Ja’afari that
the worst offenders were the CIU which reported directly to the Minister of the Interior.
944.  The UK military’s investigation into the incident concluded that no crime had been
committed by the UK’s soldiers, as reported to Dr Reid by a junior MOD official on
28 November.891 Two separate investigations were carried out by military officers from
the regiment responsible for troops at the Jameat cordon who judged that the actions
of British troops were compliant with the Rules of Engagement and their right to self
defence. They deemed that no further investigation by the Special Investigation Branch
was required. Those findings had been reviewed by “a higher authority” and endorsed
by AM Torpy and Gen Walker.
945.  At the Chiefs of Staff meeting on 5 October, the minutes recorded a “need to
resolve differences” between the UK’s enquiry into events at Jameat and those of
the Iraqi investigation team.892 They hoped to close the issue with a “Joint (Iraqi/UK)
statement when one could be agreed”.
889  JIC Assessment, 28 September 2005, ‘Iraq: the Security Situation in the South’.
890  eGram 14641/05 Baghdad to FCO London, 1 October 2005, ‘Iraq: Basra Investigation’.
891  Minute MOD [junior official] to PS/SofS [MOD], 28 November 2005, ‘Iraq: Investigation of Events in
Basra on 19 September’.
892  Minutes, 5 October 2005, Chiefs of Staff meeting.
272
Previous page | Contents | Next page