Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
brigade should be able to manage a single, well-populated province” the size
of Basra, but there were four options available:
{{a brigade responsible for security in a single province;
{{a UK divisional headquarters could take responsibility for security, under
Coalition command, in a wider area of Iraq (US planners envisaged Basra,
Maysan, Dhi Qar and Wasit being a single sector), supported by Coalition
partners, which, the paper recognised, could be difficult to find;
{{deployment of the ARRC in addition or as an alternative to a brigade; or
{{withdrawal of all forces in the medium term, although it was warned that
would be politically difficult.
Whether to follow the US plan, which had to be right, to administer Iraq as
a whole and not seek general UK responsibility for the administration of
any geographic area in the medium term. In any area where the UK took
responsibility for security, it could, with a UN mandate, also take on wider
responsibility for reconstruction (including humanitarian assistance and aspects
of civil administration), but that would “very likely be beyond the resources of
the UK alone and have implications for domestic Departments”.
532.  MOD advice to Mr Hoon was explicit about the inadequacy of those
preparations.
533.  The MOD briefing for Mr Hoon stated:
“… any UK involvement in the administration of post-conflict Iraq will necessarily
require a significant civilian administrative and specialist component; this component
has not yet been identified or resourced by OGDs. This is the key issue.
The success of civil administration will be essential to Iraq’s long term future.
The UK military cannot do this on their own.
“… [T]he current Defence Planning Assumption is that UK forces can only sustain
large scale operations for a period of six months without doing long term damage
to capability. This implies that UK forces reduce to a medium scale (i.e. roughly one
brigade) post-conflict TELIC commitment.
“… US planning is currently tending to assume UK involvement in Phase IV at a
level that is the maximum, if not higher than, that we can sustain. If Ministers wish
to set limits on the UK’s Phase IV contribution they should be set now so that
US planning can be adjusted
“… [A]s US planning stands, the UK will need substantial support from other nations.
There are no arrangements yet in place formally to gather such support. Such
support will be largely contingent on a suitable second/third UNSCR and a UN
mandate for the occupation of Iraq. The FCO need to build on their recent ‘market
468
Previous page | Contents | Next page