Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
339.  The JIC’s Key Judgements were:
Only massive military force would be guaranteed to topple Saddam. The regime
expects a US attack […].
The clear prospect of a major attack would put the regime under unprecedented
pressure. But regime cohesion is unlikely to collapse in the absence of a large
scale invasion.
Saddam relies on a mixture of patronage and extreme fear to retain power and
contain opposition. Real loyalty and support for his regime is confined to the top
of the hierarchy.
The Special Republican Guard (SRG) and the Republican Guard Forces
Command (RGFC) are more reliable than the Regular Army (RA). All would
initially fight a US‑led attack. Once the regime was perceived as doomed the
military’s will to fight on would be sorely tested.
Regime disintegration would be most likely if Iraqi ground forces were being
comprehensively defeated; if top military officers could be persuaded that their
fate was not irrevocably tied to that of Saddam; or if Saddam himself were to
be killed. Military units are more likely to suffer mass desertions than revolt as
coherent units.”161
340.  The Assessment also stated:
“Saddam and his regime have proved durable …
“The Iraqi military are aware of their vulnerability to air power, probably their greatest
weakness; their main way of mitigating this is through dispersal, including into
urban areas […] We have only fragmentary intelligence indicating how the regime
might deal with an all‑out attack including ground forces. But we assess that only
massive military force could be guaranteed to topple Saddam.”
341.  Addressing the policy implications of the Assessment, the JIC stated: “Saddam
and his regime must be convinced that any move to topple him is serious and likely to
succeed before they begin to feel the pressure.”
Mr Hoon’s proposal for a collective Ministerial discussion
342.  In early July, Mr Hoon proposed a collective Ministerial discussion, which
Mr Straw supported.
343.  On 2 July, Mr Watkins reported to Sir David Manning that “US military thinking is
quite well advanced”, but US planners were assuming offensive operations to overthrow
Saddam Hussein “in a policy void”.162 The US “end‑state to be achieved after conflict”
161 JIC Assessment, 4 July 2002, ‘Iraq: Regime Cohesion’.
162 Letter Watkins to Manning, 2 July 2002, ‘Iraq’.
226
Previous page | Contents | Next page