Previous page | Contents | Next page
14.1  |  Military equipment (post-conflict)
1156.  Lt Gen Shirreff said that the Americans had those capabilities, as did the UK,
but the UK did not have them in MND(SE).
1157.  On 8 February, Lt Gen Houghton provided ACM Stirrup with an Op TELIC force
protection assessment.609
1158.  Lt Gen Houghton asked ACM Stirrup to note that there was a “presentational
difficulty” around the move to the COB because it only provided Tiers 1 and 2 level
protection, but that the risk should be viewed “in the context of the aggregate threat”.
That threat included IDF, surface‑to‑air missiles, IEDs, direct fire and the ability of the
enemy to gain information about UK vulnerabilities. The move to BAS would lead to
a “safer overall force posture” because UK forces would “become less exposed to the
most effective means of attack”, IEDs, and would allow a concentration of resources
to ameliorate risk.
1159.  Lt Gen Houghton wrote that the “most likely” way insurgents would disrupt
operations from the COB was through IDF. The frequency of attacks was increasing
and the likelihood of a successful attack had “increased to an estimated 95 percent
probability within the next three months”.
1160.  Lt Gen Houghton suggested that the most effective ways of reducing the
potential scale of a successful IDF attack was through physical compartmentalisation
of communal areas, and procedures to limit the number of people in “any given area”.
Existing construction work would conclude in June, but “only a move to suitable
protected structures” would offer “a notably higher level of protection”.
1161.  The priority was for Tier 3 infrastructure in communal areas:
“… we have decided in principle to provide hardened dining facilities (estimated at
$14m and 20 months to complete) and to begin expansion of our Tier 3 footprint
(current estimate additional $60‑70m and an additional 10 months) … We should
now form a judgement on the cost/benefit of proceeding with a more extensive Tier 3
build in the context of our enduring Overwatch posture.”
1162.  The use of C‑RAM promised (subject to proof of capability trials) to provide “a
significant enhancement” to force protection, although there would be some integration
issues to overcome.
1163.  Lt Gen Houghton continued:
“We are not fully confident the requirement for increased persistency of ISTAR
coverage around the COB and over Basra City can be achieved. The UOR
programme to deliver TUAV [Tactical UAV] is on track to deliver an ISD of July
2007, although the funded provision may not fully meet our original statement
of requirement …”
609  Minute CJO to PSO/CDS, 8 February 2007, ‘OP TELIC – Force Protection (FP) Assessment’.
197
Previous page | Contents | Next page