Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
1026.  Mr Hoon’s Private Secretary wrote to Mr Rycroft with “initial advice” on the US
proposal on 29 April.601 The letter reflected Mr Hoon’s view that:
“… any significant increase in our military commitment in Iraq would need to be
considered in the context of the whole cross-Government effort … if we were to
take on Najaf and Qadisiyah we would need FCO and DFID to help ensure that
acceptable arrangements are in place on the CPA (and post-CPA) side.”
1027.  In late April, allegations of abuse by Coalition soldiers in Abu Ghraib prison
become public. Section 9.2 describes the effect of those and other allegations of abuse.
1028.  Major General Andrew Stewart, GOC MND(SE) at that time, was one of several
witnesses who told the Inquiry that the pictures of Abu Ghraib had had a “significant
effect” on MND(SE), where the public began turning against Coalition Forces.602
1029.  Mr Drummond and Mr Mark Lowcock, DFID Director General Corporate
Performance and Knowledge Sharing, visited Iraq from 27 to 30 April.603 They reported
that, while the security situation had deteriorated, there were encouraging signs
of progress on the economy. The foundations of a market economy had been laid,
including through the currency exchange, but the reforms were “only half done”; fuel and
utility price subsidies had not been reduced and the Public Distribution System for food
had not been reformed. They concluded that:
“… whether Iraq will remain a single resource (oil) economy with the potential for a
small elite to recapture the revenue or broaden out into a modern market economy
is still to play for.”
1030.  Mr Drummond and Mr Lowcock also reported that the DFID programme was
focused on building the capacity of the Iraqi Government in Baghdad and the South.
Most DFID funding for reconstruction was flowing through the World Bank and UN
Trust Funds, “thereby encouraging both to engage fully in Iraq”. Mr Drummond and
Mr Lowcock commented that that seemed right.
1031.  Mr Richmond reported by telegram on 30 April that security remained the “key
threat” to development and reconstruction:
“The PMO remains optimistic about project implementation but others are sceptical.
NGOs report many international staff out of the country; USAID are still below
full strength, with few staff outside Baghdad, and the PMO reports at least some
pull out/pull back by key construction companies including Bechtel, Siemens and
possibly GE [General Electric].”604
601  Letter Baker to Rycroft, 29 April 2004, ‘Iraq: UK Response to US Approaches’.
602  Public hearing, 9 December 2009, page 72.
603  Minute Drummond and Lowcock to Private Secretary [Benn], 30 April 2004, ‘Iraq Visit Report’.
604  Telegram 205 IraqRep to FCO London, 30 April 2004, ‘Iraq: Reconstruction, Development and
Essential Services’.
178
Previous page | Contents | Next page