Previous page | Contents | Next page
3.2  |  Development of UK strategy and options, January to April 2002 – “axis of evil” to Crawford
449.  Following a discussion with key officials, which is addressed in Section 6.1,
Mr Hoon wrote to Mr Blair, on 22 March, stating:
“The key strategic problem is the spread of WMD – of which Saddam is only one
unpleasant dimension. A more active counter-proliferation strategy is required for
the region as a whole (for example any Iraqi government will seek WMD if Iran is
getting them so our strategy must cover both). On Iraq, we should support President
Bush and be ready for a military contribution … [W]e should be involved in the detail
before we commit our forces.”
“… In objective terms, Iran may be the greater problem for the UK … Ironically, we
have Saddam Hussein bound into an established control mechanism. There is some
substance in the US view that he as an individual is at the root of the WMD risk in
Iraq. But any Iraqi government is likely to try and achieve a balance of forces with
Iran. I strongly support the parallel campaign by Jack [Straw] to tackle Iran through
the IAEA system.”161
450.  Mr Hoon identified three factors that the UK should keep in mind in considering
how to support President Bush:
The US already has heavy land forces in the region … [and] is planning on the
basis that it would take 90 days to deploy all necessary forces to the region; it
would take us longer.
Despite 10 years of searching, no one has found a credible successor to
Saddam.
If a coalition takes control of Baghdad (especially without catching Saddam),
it will probably have to stay there for many years.”
451.  Mr Hoon wrote that the UK “should support President Bush and be ready for a
military contribution” for Iraq. Mr Hoon cautioned that the UK was:
“… not privy to detailed US planning, either strategically across the region or on
Iraq. Before any decision to commit British forces, we ought to know that the US
has a militarily plausible plan with a reasonable prospect of success compared to
the risks and within the framework of international law. Our involvement in planning
would improve their process – and help address our lead time problem. It would
enable either CDS to reassure you that there is a sound military plan or give you a
basis to hold back if the US cannot find a sensible scheme … I suggest one of your
objectives at Crawford should be to secure agreement to the UK’s participation in
US military planning …”
161  Letter Hoon to Prime Minister, 22 March 2002, ‘Iraq’.
467
Previous page | Contents | Next page