Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
Mr Blair had, over the previous month, expressed his concern to Mr Hoon over
the additional costs associated with providing a large scale land force as part of
a UK contribution to a US‑led invasion of Iraq, and asked whether those costs
had been discussed with the Treasury.
The MOD and the Treasury had, by the middle of October, developed broad
estimates of the cost of providing a large scale land force. Mr Brown had also
been provided with detailed analyses of the implications for public expenditure of
a conflict in Iraq.
At the meeting where the decision to offer a large scale land force was taken,
Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, Chief of the Defence Staff, stated his belief that
providing a large military contribution to the campaign would mean that the
UK would be under less pressure to make a large contribution to post‑conflict
reconstruction.
In February and March 2003, when the Government considered whether to
take on military responsibility for a geographical area of Iraq in the post‑conflict
period.
The MOD and the Treasury had, by February, developed detailed estimates of
the potential cost of such a commitment (although there remained a number of
unknown factors).
When the Government acceded in April to the US request that it assume
leadership of a military AOR encompassing four provinces in southern Iraq, it did
so without a robust analysis either of the strategic implications for the UK or of
the military’s capacity to support the UK’s potential obligations in the region. A
step of such magnitude should have been taken deliberately, having considered
the wider strategic and resource implications and contingent liabilities.
In the event, the UK was responsible for security in its AOR for six years,
initially as an Occupying Power and, from June 2004, in support of the Iraqi
Government.
In advance of Cabinet’s decision on 17 March 2003 to issue an ultimatum
to Iraq and ask the House of Commons to endorse the use of military action
against Iraq if necessary.
26.  The extent to which cost should be a determining factor in reaching a policy decision
is for Ministers to judge based on the circumstances of each particular case. But it is
essential that those taking collective responsibility for a decision have the ability to make
an informed judgement about the likely costs and risks.
27.  Neither Cabinet nor any of the Ministerial meetings convened to discuss military
options and the UK’s role in a post‑conflict Iraq were provided with detailed cost
estimates for the various policy options for the UK’s involvement in Iraq, and their
implications for public expenditure.
574
Previous page | Contents | Next page