Previous page | Contents | Next page
Executive Summary
for the administration and reconstruction of post‑conflict Iraq, the reluctance
of potential international partners to contribute to the post‑conflict effort.
The Government, which lacked both clear Ministerial oversight of post‑conflict
strategy, planning and preparation, and effective co‑ordination between
government departments, failed to analyse or manage those risks adequately.
Mr Blair, who recognised the significance of the post‑conflict phase, did
not press President Bush for definite assurances about US plans, did not
consider or seek advice on whether the absence of a satisfactory plan called
for reassessment of the terms of the UK’s engagement and did not make
agreement on such a plan a condition of UK participation in military action.
The invasion
815.  The following key findings are from Section 8:
It took less than a month to achieve the departure of Saddam Hussein
and the fall of Baghdad.
The decision to advance into Basra was made by military commanders
on the ground.
The UK was unprepared for the media response to the initial difficulties. It had
also underestimated the need for sustained communication of key strategic
messages to inform public opinion about the objectives and progress of the
military campaign, including in Iraq.
For any future military operations, arrangements to agree and disseminate key
strategic messages need to be put in place, in both London and on the ground,
before operations begin.
The UK acceded to the post‑invasion US request that it assume leadership of a
military Area of Responsibility (AOR) encompassing four provinces in southern
Iraq, a position it then held for six years, without a formal Ministerial decision and
without carrying out a robust analysis of the strategic implications for the UK or
the military’s capacity to support the UK’s potential obligations in the region.
The post‑conflict period
816.  The following key findings are from Section 9.8, and relate to evidence in
Sections 9.1 to 9.7:
Between 2003 and 2009, the UK’s most consistent strategic objective in relation
to Iraq was to reduce the level of its deployed forces.
The UK struggled from the start to have a decisive effect on the Coalition
Provisional Authority’s (CPA’s) policies, even though it was fully implicated
in its decisions as joint Occupying Power.
123
Previous page | Contents | Next page