Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
71.  On 1 April, the IPU advised Mr Straw on the UK’s future engagement with ORHA.45
The IPU assessed that, while ORHA was “in many ways a sub‑optimal organisation
for delivering the UK’s Phase IV46 objectives”, it was “the only game in town”. There
was, however, “ample scope” to use UK secondees to exert leverage over US Phase
IV planning and implementation. The IPU recommended that the UK should continue
to commit resources to ORHA where the UK “could add real value and exert influence
over emerging US perspectives and plans”.
72.  The IPU also recommended that the UK should:
continue to make clear to the US the limits within which the UK, including UK
personnel within ORHA, could operate;
seek close consultation on ORHA’s plans, to ensure that they did not cross UK
“red lines”; and
subject to those points, confirm Maj Gen Cross as Deputy to Lt Gen Garner.
73.  The IPU reported that ORHA, which at that stage was in Kuwait, had approximately
200 staff, expected to rise to over 1,000 by the time it deployed to Iraq. The UK and
Australia each had six officers seconded to ORHA. Five more UK secondees were
“in the pipeline” and one was working in ORHA’s back office in the Pentagon. The UK
secondees were “fully integrated” and “adding significant value”. At ORHA’s request, the
IPU was considering whether to strengthen UK representation, particularly in the areas
of public relations, civil administration and humanitarian operations.
74.  On 2 April, Mr Peter Ricketts, FCO Political Director, sent Sir David Manning an
earlier version of the IPU paper, which identified areas in which the UK was considering
strengthening its representation: public relations, civil administration, humanitarian
advice and administrative support for existing secondees.47
75.  Mr Tony Brenton, Chargé d’Affaires at the British Embassy Washington, warned
Sir David Manning on 3 April that the UK was “in danger of being left behind” on
ORHA.48 The list of senior officials to “shadow” ministries in Iraq was almost complete
and those officials would start deploying soon. Australia had bid for a place. The UK had
not, even though the US had said it would be open to such a bid. Mr Brenton advised
that:
“Following our significant military efforts we surely have an interest in following
through to the civilian phase. If so, given the advanced state of US preparations,
it will be important that we vigorously pursue the point at next week’s talks [at
Hillsborough].”
45  Minute Iraq Planning Unit to Private Secretary [FCO], 1 April 2003, ‘Iraq: ORHA’ attaching Paper IPU,
28 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA)’.
46  The military term for the post‑conflict phase of operations in Iraq.
47  Letter Ricketts to Manning, 2 April 2003, ‘ORHA’ attaching Paper Iraq Planning Unit, 27 March 2003,
‘Iraq: Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA)’.
48  Letter Brenton to Manning, 3 April 2003, ‘Post Conflict Iraq’.
256
Previous page | Contents | Next page