6.3 |
Military equipment (pre-conflict)
“To meet
the requirement in the short term, current UOR action will give the
UK an
identical
Combat ID solution to that deployed by the US. In the
circumstances, this
is as
close to the ideal as we could have hoped to achieve.”
352.
AVM Loader
provided a summary note of work in progress on Combat ID for
ACM
Bagnall,
recording that, “contrary to press speculation, progress continues
to be made
since the
conflict in the Gulf”, but that “notwithstanding any measures taken
or currently
under
consideration, fratricide will always remain a real risk in the
heat of conflict”.168
353.
AVM Loader
explained that work continued but progress had been slow
because
measures
could not be developed in isolation. The alignment of UK measures
with those
in the US
had “been hampered by the lack of a coherent policy” but, to ensure
that some
capability
could be delivered in time, UORs had been based upon assumptions
agreed
with key
stakeholders and US Department of Defense and Army
staff.
354.
At the request
of ACM Bagnall, the update was circulated to MOD Ministers
and
the Chiefs
of Staff.
355.
In the House
of Lords on 9 January, Lord Bach was asked about the
availability
of satisfactory
Combat ID equipment for British troops in any potential Gulf
conflict.169
He replied:
“… we take
combat identification and the risk of friendly fire extremely
seriously
… Lives
depend on it. We believe that our combat identification procedures
are
effective.
We have deployed successfully as a country on many operations since
the
tragedies
in this field during the Gulf conflict. There have been no reported
incidents
of
fratricide, or blue on blue, involving UK forces. I say that with
caution because
whatever
technology one puts in, and however sophisticated it may be, these
things
sometimes
happen.
“In the
event of military action, British troops will be fully
interoperable with United
States
troops for combat identification. That capability, including new
equipment
options,
are [sic] currently being procured.”
356.
One of the
questions put to Mr Hoon by Mr Jenkin in the House of
Commons on
20 January
(referred to earlier in this Section) was whether British troops
would have
access to
electronic identification equipment, already fitted to US tanks and
armour,
to prevent
the risk of fratricide.170
Mr Hoon
replied:
“ … a
question I dealt with when I made my last statement, action is in
hand to
procure the
necessary equipment to ensure that the equipment used by our
forces
is in
every way compatible with the equipment that the United States is
using.”
168
Minute
MA/VCDS to PS/SofS [MOD], 9 January 2003, ‘Combat
Identification’ attaching Minute
ACDS(Ops)
to MA/VCDS, 8 January, ‘Combat Identification’.
169
House of
Lords, Official
Report, 9 January
2003, columns 1144-1145.
170
House of
Commons, Official
Report, 20 January
2003, columns 35-37.
55