Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.2  |  Military planning for the invasion, January to March 2003
79.  Mr Powell replied: “I assume you are drawing up a lot of difficult questions to put
to the Chiefs.”19
MOD advice to No.10 on deployment to the South
80.  The MOD alerted No.10 on 8 January to the proposed deployments to the
South, which would be crucial to the US plan.
81.  Addressing the perceived advantages and disadvantages, the MOD stated
that the South offered a high profile role which was achievable within US timelines
and offered the UK a significant voice in US decisions.
82.  The disadvantages included the impact on the US if the UK subsequently
decided not to participate in military operations.
83.  A letter from Mr Hoon’s Private Office to Sir David Manning on 8 January reported
the US proposal and the potential roles in the South for UK forces.20
84.  The MOD advised that the US judged time was too short to deploy both a US and
UK division through Turkey and that: “Inevitably the US priority” was to “keep alive
the possibility of deploying their own division … to maintain the strategic benefit of a
northern axis”.
85.  After describing the proposed roles for three brigades, the MOD stated:
“On a first reading, there are a number of attractions. This would be a high-profile
role for UK ground forces at the beginning of any campaign, in an area in which
the threat (barring WMD use) is likely to be limited. When combined with the offer
of US logistic support … this has the potential to allow a significant reduction in the
overall number of Reservists we might require. Our initial assessment suggests
that we could achieve deployment within current US timelines, and sustain such
a force in theatre potentially for some time, allowing political flexibility over timing.
The proposed UK role in the South should enable US forces to reach further,
faster, whilst providing a coherent transition to aftermath operations – an area of
acknowledged UK expertise – in territory captured early in the campaign. It would
demonstrate at the very beginning of ground operations that this is a Coalition,
rather than a US-only, campaign …
“On the other hand, there may be some disadvantages. The proposed UK role
would be crucial to the US plan in the South. Whilst this would give us a significant
voice in decision-making, it would also increase the military impact on the US on
any eventual UK decision not to participate in an operation: clearly, this would
place us in a very awkward position if the US seemed likely to want to proceed in
19  Manuscript comment Powell on Minute Bowen to Manning, 8 January 2003, ‘Iraq: Chiefs of Staff
Meeting on 9 [sic] January’.
20  Letter Williams to Manning, 8 January 2003, ‘Iraq: UK Land Contribution’.
399
Previous page | Contents | Next page