Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.1  |  Development of the military options for an invasion of Iraq
Baroness Morgan (Director of Political and Government Relations), Mr Campbell and
Sir David Manning, on 23 July.188
438.  The discussion in the meeting and the actions that followed are addressed in
Section 3.3.
439.  In relation to military planning, the record of the meeting produced by Mr Matthew
Rycroft, Mr Blair’s Private Secretary for Foreign Affairs, stated:
Mr Scarlett summarised the intelligence and latest (4 July) JIC Assessment:
“Saddam’s regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to
overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action.” Saddam was “worried
and expected an attack”, but he was “not convinced” that an attack would be
“immediate or overwhelming”.
Sir Richard Dearlove reported that there was “a perceptible shift in attitude”
in Washington: “Military action was now seen as inevitable.” President Bush
“wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction
of terrorism and WMD”.
Adm Boyce reported that Secretary Rumsfeld and President Bush would be
briefed by CENTCOM planners in early August. The US was examining two
military options, and saw the “UK (and Kuwait) as essential”. The three main
options for UK involvement were:
“(i) Basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus plus […] SF [Special Forces]
squadrons.
(ii) As above, with maritime and air assets in addition.
(iii) As above, plus a land contribution of up to 40,000 perhaps with a discrete
role in northern Iraq entering from Turkey, tying down two Iraqi divisions.”
Mr Hoon said that the US had already begun “spikes of activity” to put pressure
on the regime. In his view, January was the most likely timing for military action.
Mr Straw stated that it “seemed clear” that President Bush had “made up his
mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided”.
Lord Goldsmith warned that the desire for regime change was not a legal basis
for military action. Self‑defence and humanitarian intervention could not be the
basis for military action in this case.
Mr Blair had stated: “The two key issues were whether the military plan worked
and whether we had the political strategy to give the military plan the space
to work.”
Adm Boyce did not yet know if the US battleplan was “workable”. There were
“lots of questions”, for example “the consequences if Saddam Hussein used
WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began”.
188 Minute Rycroft to Manning, 23 July 2002, ‘Iraq: Prime Minister’s Meeting, 23 July’.
241
Previous page | Contents | Next page