Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.1  |  Development of the military options for an invasion of Iraq
221.  Lt Gen Dutton told the Inquiry:
“… we were all interested to know whether there was any planning going on for
other potential operations. I used to ask that question of the J‑3, General Newbold
… and he would be quite honest in saying that they were doing staff checks for any
number of contingencies and, if asked specifically about Iraq, he would not deny that
they were looking at what they could do, if asked …”113
222.  Lt Gen Pigott sent Mr Hoon an update on the work of the SPG on 10 May.114
223.  Lt Gen Pigott stated:
“Any thinking we do about joining the US in military operations against the Iraqi
regime needs to be informed by our thinking in two key areas: the impact of potential
courses of action open to a coalition and the capability the UK might contribute to
such a coalition.”
224.  The SPG had concluded that the US had decided to pursue regime change; the
question was when, including whether to pursue weapons inspections before a military
build‑up. The MOD’s “best guess” was that the recommendation would be for action at
“the turn of the year” but it did not expect to be “exposed” to US planning until advice
had been put to President Bush, probably in late May. The UK would “need to be ready
to discuss Iraq with the Americans as soon as they share planning with us”.
225.  Work had been commissioned on the capabilities the UK might aim to provide
within periods of three to four and six to eight months; setting out the key decision and
deployment points.
226.  Lt Gen Pigott suggested that this could lead to “a note to the Prime Minister
setting out these and the financial implications of taking contingency action now”. The
advantage of characterising this work as “contingency planning and considering generic
force packages” was that it offered “the possibility of wider debate and scrutiny in the
department than would be available if we were to consider specific courses of action, for
operational security reasons”. The work needed to be supported by “thinking on what
‘end state’ HMG is seeking to achieve and about the legal basis on which action would
be taken forward”.
227.  Mr Hoon noted Lt Gen Pigott’s advice and asked for a meeting to discuss the work
and when it would be appropriate to convene a meeting with Mr Blair and Mr Straw.115
228.  In a letter the same day as Lt Gen Pigott’s update on wider issues, which is
addressed in Section 3.3, Mr Webb told Mr Ricketts:
113 Public hearing, 12 July 2010, pages 2‑3.
114 Minute DCDS(C) to APS/Secretary of State [MOD], 10 May 2002, ‘Iraq’.
115 Minute Williams to DCDS(C), 13 May 2002, ‘Iraq’.
209
Previous page | Contents | Next page