Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.4  |  Planning and preparation for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, mid-2001 to January 2003
“… The FCO are content for activity to be centred on MOD to preserve the best
prospect for dialogue with US DoD. All scoping activity would be confined to the
minimum number of named individuals.”
196.  Sir Kevin Tebbit explained to the Inquiry that: “At this early stage … April 2002,
we did not know whether the Americans were going to go for a military option and, if so,
which one. So this was very, very preliminary ground clearing.”117
197.  An MOD-led, inter-departmental group of senior officials, headed by Lt Gen
Pigott, was established in April 2002. That body, which came to be known as the
Pigott Group, considered issues related to UK participation in a US-led ground
offensive in Iraq.
198.  In spring 2002 the Pigott Group was the FCO’s principal forum for
contributions to cross-government consideration of post-conflict Iraq.
199.  Mr Peter Ricketts, the FCO Political Director and FCO member of the Pigott
Group, took responsibility for Whitehall consideration of the UK’s desired “end
state” for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq.
200.  On 25 April, Mr Peter Ricketts, the FCO Political Director, informed Mr Straw’s
Private Office, Sir Michael Jay and a small number of other senior FCO officials, that the
MOD had established “a small group of senior officials and military planners [the Pigott
Group] to think about the issues that would be involved in any military operation in Iraq,
as the basis for initial contingency planning in the MOD”.118 Participants included the
FCO, Cabinet Office, JIC and Intelligence Agencies.
201.  Mr Ricketts described the Group’s work as “a sensitive exercise”. Participation was
being tightly restricted and paperwork would be kept to a minimum, but it was “important
that the FCO was involved from the ground floor with MOD thinking”.
202.  The first meeting of the Pigott Group took place in late April. Mr Ricketts reported
that it had covered “mainly the political context, including the implications of the
Arab/Israel crisis, attitudes in the Arab states, the risks of Iraq disintegrating and the
consequences of that”.
203.  The meeting also considered how to define the objective, or “end state” of a
military operation:
“As we found in the run-up to the Afghanistan operation, defining the objective of
an operation is crucial since this defines the scope of the operations and hence
the scale of military effort required. The MOD had tried their hand at a definition of
the ‘end state’ which was discussed at length, and I undertook to produce a further
version.
117  Public hearing, 3 December 2009, page 15.
118  Minute Ricketts to Private Secretary [FCO], 25 April 2002, ‘Iraq: Contingency Planning’.
147
Previous page | Contents | Next page