Previous page | Contents | Next page
10.2  |  Reconstruction: July 2004 to July 2009
consider the lessons that DFID had identified since the I-CAP was produced,
and how it would respond to them;
consider how the reconstruction effort could and should contribute to broader
UK objectives; and
consider whether the level of resources available to achieve DFID’s objectives
in Iraq was right, and whether DFID was working in the most effective way.
336.  In the absence of that analysis, the I-CAP review could not (and did not) test the
position that DFID had reached.
337.  Mr Anderson visited Iraq from 13 to 18 June.191
338.  In his report to Mr Dinham, copies of which were sent to officials in DFID, the
FCO and the MOD, Mr Anderson identified a number of “strategic issues”, including
the expected decline in the amount of aid going to Iraq. US funding would decline from
US$18.4bn over two years (the current IRFF2 package) to around US$1bn in 2006/07.
Japanese grants were “now exhausted” and DFID’s programme would decline in
2006/07. There might be “modest increases” in UN and World Bank programmes but
“even in the most optimistic scenario, there will be a dramatic decline in aid levels due
to the changing US position”.
339.  That rapid decline raised three strategic issues:
What impact would declining aid have on security?
Was this the right time for donors to be reducing aid? Research showed that
aid during or immediately following conflict tended to be wasted. It was most
effective between four and seven years after a conflict.
Was DFID right to treat Iraq as a MIC? The planned decline in DFID’s
programme was based on the “premise” that Iraq had adequate resources to
fund its own development. But did that hold true when security was poor and
oil revenues difficult to obtain?
340.  DFID has not been able to provide the Inquiry with any response from Mr Dinham,
or any record of a discussion of aid volumes.192
341.  Dr John Reid, the Defence Secretary, circulated a paper on the options for future
UK force posture in Iraq to DOP(I) on 16 June (see Section 9.4).193
342.  The paper stated that there was a “clear UK military aspiration” to transfer security
responsibilities to Iraqi forces in Muthanna and Maysan in October 2005, with the
remaining MND(SE) provinces (Basra and Dhi Qar) following in April 2006. That was
191  Minute Anderson to Dinham, 19 June 2005, ‘Back to Office Report: Iraq 13 – 18 June’.
192  Email DFID [junior official] to Iraq Inquiry [junior official], 19 June 2013, ‘Iraq Inquiry New Queries’.
193  Paper Reid, 14 June 2005, ‘Options for Future UK Force Posture in Iraq’.
253
Previous page | Contents | Next page