Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.3  |  Military equipment (pre-conflict)
and deployment points. Lt Gen Pigott suggested that this could lead to “a note to the
Prime Minister setting out these and the financial implications of taking contingency
action now”.
84.  General Sir Michael Walker was Chief of the General Staff (CGS) from 2000 to
February 2003. His Private Office wrote to the Chiefs of Staff Secretariat on 13 June,
referring to the 9 May advice on equipment lead times.39 He stated that the advice
highlighted “just a few of several areas where key deficiencies exist” if a medium or large
scale operation were to be undertaken. Other areas included battlefield helicopters,
the issue of stocks and the supply of items such as ammunition. Gen Walker would
elaborate on these other areas at the Chiefs of Staff meeting on 18 June.40
85.  The minutes from the weekly Chiefs of Staff meeting do not record any reference
to a discussion on equipment planning for Iraq.41
86.  As work on military options in the MOD progressed, it was recognised that,
if a large scale option was pursued, not all of the essential UOR equipment
required for operations in the Gulf could be procured and fitted within six months.
87.  A paper produced by the SPG on 24 May, ‘Contingency Thinking: Force Generation
and Deployment for the Gulf’, was sent to the Chiefs of Staff and a limited number of
named MOD addressees.42
88.  The SPG identified a number of key assumptions that included:
Operations would not commence before autumn 2002.
Decisions would not be taken incrementally because that would “add to timelines
by making force generation increasingly complex and costly”.
Enhancements would be needed to enable units to operate in the Gulf. That
would expose preparations from an early stage given the significant number of
contracts that would be required with industry.
89.  Three broad levels of effort in line with the MOD’s planning assumptions were
examined:
the maximum the UK could provide (a large scale contribution);
a “credible” medium scale package; and
a small scale package.
90.  Reflecting the UK’s existing military commitments and the most recent MOD
budgetary planning round, the SPG advised that the UK could realistically produce a
39  Note MA1/CGS to COSSEC, 13 June 2002, ‘Iraq – Equipment Lead Times’.
40  It is believed that Gen Walker’s Office was referring to the Think Tank discussion on 18 June referred
to later in this Section, for which there was no record.
41  Minutes, 18 June 2002, Chiefs of Staff meeting.
42  Paper SPG, 24 May 2002, ‘Contingency Thinking: Force Generation and Deployment for the Gulf’.
15
Previous page | Contents | Next page