6.1 |
Development of the military options for an invasion of
Iraq
planning by
default, and Adm Boyce’s advice in Mr Blair’s meeting on 31
October
that US
planning was proceeding on the basis that there would not be a UK
land
contribution.
954.
Mr Hoon’s
oral evidence to the Inquiry suggested that the US had
given
the
impression that, in the absence of a firm decision, it was
discounting a UK
contribution.
955.
Mr Hoon
told the Inquiry that, in October, the UK had:
“… pretty
much assumed that the Americans had discounted the prospect of
…
[Package 3]
and were planning without our involvement, simply because
we
had not
taken the decisions that were required in the timescale that was at
that
“… by
October … we had had this discussion on several occasions …
my
understanding,
by the middle of October, was that the Americans were
assuming
we wouldn’t
be there … on the land [option] … So essentially … what I was
really
saying to
the Prime Minister was, ‘You have got to decide. You have got to
decide
whether we
are going to offer this third option and this package of an
armoured
division on
the land’ … eventually … probably as late as the very end of
October,
that
decision was then taken.”377
957.
Evidence
about CENTCOM’s position in documents at the time,
including
Adm Boyce’s
discussion with Gen Franks on 10 October, Mr Johnson’s
advice to
Mr Hoon
of 25 October, and Mr Bowen’s report of the Chiefs of Staff
discussion on
26 October,
indicated that CENTCOM continued to plan on the basis that the
UK
might offer
a land contribution.
958.
The US
Administration wanted UK support and bases for political as well
as
military
reasons.
959.
It is not
clear what specific information caused Adm Boyce and Mr Hoon
to
advise in
late October 2002 that the US was planning on the basis there would
be
no UK land
contribution.
960.
The MOD
advice and Mr Hoon’s minute of 15 October argued that a
combat
role would
be time limited, and that it would help the UK avoid a significant
and
protracted
military involvement in Iraq post‑conflict.
376
Public
hearing, 19 January 2010, page 36.
377
Public
hearing, 19 January 2010, pages 45‑46.
319