Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.1  |  Development of the military options for an invasion of Iraq
8.  The principal scales of effort defined in SDR 98 were:
small scale: “a deployment of battalion size or equivalent” such as the Royal
Navy ARMILLA patrol in the Gulf, the British contribution to United Nations
Forces in Cyprus (UNFICYP), and the Royal Air Force operations enforcing the
No‑Fly Zones (NFZs) over northern and southern Iraq;
medium scale: “deployments of brigade size or equivalent” for warfighting or
other operations, such as the UK contribution in the mid‑1990s to the NATO‑led
Implementation Force (IFOR) in Bosnia;
large scale: deployments of division size or equivalent, the “nearest recent
example” being the UK contribution to the 1991 Gulf Conflict, “although on that
occasion the British division deployed with only two of its three brigades”. That
was “the maximum size of force we would plan to be able to contribute to peace
enforcement operations, or to regional conflicts outside the NATO area”; and
very large scale and full scale: all the forces that would be made available
to NATO to meet a major threat such as significant aggression against an ally.
The difference between the two reflected the time available for preparation –
“warning time”, and the size of the threat.
9.  The Planning Assumptions also defined:
endurance: the likely duration of individual Military Tasks. The force structure
for each Service needed to be able to sustain tasks for the required period,
including where necessary by rotating individual units deployed and, where units
were deployed on operations, allowing units a period of respite between each
deployment as set out in the “Harmony Guidelines”4 of each Service.
concurrency: the number of operations of a given scale of effort and duration
that could be sustained by the force structure. SDR 98 concluded that “not to
be able to conduct two medium scale operations at the same time would be an
unacceptable constraint on our ability to discharge Britain’s commitments and
responsibilities. It would, for example, oblige us to withdraw from an enduring
commitment such as Bosnia in order to respond to a second crisis.”5
10.  The Defence Strategic Plan (DSP), a confidential MOD document, included greater
detail than was published in the SDR report.6 It identified specific readiness criteria in
relation to operations against Iraq, stating:
“… we need to maintain the ability to respond within short warning times to an Iraqi
threat, and to build up forces thereafter. This again requires us to hold capabilities
needed to mount a medium scale deployment at high readiness (30 days). For a
4 Harmony guidelines are explained in Section 16.1.
5 Ministry of Defence, Strategic Defence Review: Supporting Essays, July 1998. Supporting Essay 6,
Future Military Capabilities.
6 Ministry of Defence 1998, ‘Defence Strategic Plan 1998’.
177
Previous page | Contents | Next page