Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.1  |  Development of the military options for an invasion of Iraq
• Remove the threat that any Iraqi regime may pose to the UK, UK interests
and regional stability through its failure to comply with international law and
agreements. That implied:
{{verifiable destruction of Iraq’s WMD capability; and
{{establishing a regime that had the trust of the international community.
• Reintegrate Iraq into the international community.
• Support and where possible enhance regional stability. That implied:
{{preventing the establishment of a Shia dominated Islamic fundamentalist
state; and
{{ensuring the impact of military operations was “at the very minimum …
neutral in terms of regional stability”.
• Prevent the Iraqi regime from perpetrating further humanitarian disasters.
• Enhance the security of the UK’s long‑term economic interests, including
oil supplies.
582.  The SPG defined the UK’s “Military Strategic Objectives” as:
• provide US Commanders “with support necessary for the execution of [the]
approved campaign plan, focusing first on delivery of critical capabilities”;
• assist the US to create conditions to deny Iraq’s ability to use its WMD;
• create conditions for a changed Iraqi regime;
• create conditions to strengthen regional security and stability; and
• assist US forces in securing Iraq’s oil infrastructure and production facilities.
583.  Other key points in the paper included:
• No clear picture had “yet emerged” on how the US planned to “effect … regime
change (other than … military defeat and subsequent elimination of Saddam
Hussein”.
• Iraq was experienced with chemical weapons and had experimented with
biological weapons. There was “every reason” to believe they would be used
if regime survival was threatened.
• US and UK policies on a “deterrent response to Iraqi first use of WMD” needed
to be reviewed.
• There was a need to determine what would constitute “success for an inspection
regime”.
• Package 3 was defined as including “UK Force Elements with a discrete role
in the North, within an integrated US‑led campaign”.
• The risk analysis was based on the provision of a division (minus).
• An illustrative force package included a Royal Marine Commando Group which
would be available after October as part of the maritime element, an armoured
263
Previous page | Contents | Next page