Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
departmental scrutiny to determine the concurrent requirement to resource both
theatres and define how our national aviation resources should be realigned.”33
74.  Mr Browne and Lord Drayson intervened in August 2006. Lord Drayson told the
Inquiry that he had asked Mr Browne to authorise him “to explore whether helicopters
could be found quickly and to worry about how they would be funded after we had
identified a possible solution”.34
75.  An exchange between Mr Browne and General Sir Timothy Granville‑Chapman,
Vice Chief of the Defence Staff, on 7 September illustrated how Ministers injected
urgency into addressing equipment shortfalls. When Gen Granville‑Chapman suggested
that options to add capability would be considered in October, Mr Browne responded:
“No: it should happen tomorrow!”35
76.  That prompted a review of what short‑term relief could be offered to improve
helicopter availability. In December 2007, Mr Browne wrote that helicopter support
to Iraq was “generally assessed as satisfactory”36 and that the priority was therefore
Afghanistan. The Inquiry has not seen any evidence to suggest that that assessment
was reconsidered for the remainder of Op TELIC.
Lessons
77.  In deciding to undertake concurrent operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the UK
knowingly exceeded the Defence Planning Assumptions. All resources from that point
onwards were going to be stretched. Any decision which commits the UK to extended
operations in excess of the Defence Planning Assumptions should be based on the most
rigorous analysis of its potential implications, including for the availability of relevant
capabilities for UK forces.
78.  At the start of Op TELIC, the MOD knew that it had capability gaps in relation
to protected mobility and ISTAR and that either could have a significant impact on
operations. Known gaps in such capabilities should always be clearly communicated
to Ministers.
79.  The MOD should be pro‑active in seeking to understand and articulate new or
additional equipment requirements. The MOD told the Inquiry that there was no simple
answer to the question of where the primary responsibility for identifying capability gaps
lay during Op TELIC. That is unacceptable. The roles and responsibilities for identifying
and articulating capability gaps in enduring operations must be clearly defined,
communicated and understood by those concerned. It is possible that this has been
addressed after the period covered by this Inquiry.
33  Minute Houghton to MA/VCDS, 12 June 2006, ‘Quantifying Battlefield Helicopter (BH) Requirements
on Operations’.
34  Statement, 15 December 2010, page 8.
35  Manuscript comment Browne on Minute VCDS to SofS, 7 September 2006, ‘Helicopter Capability’.
36  Letter Browne to Brown, 6 December 2007, ‘Update for the Prime Minister on Helicopter Issues’.
240
Previous page | Contents | Next page