Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.4  |  Planning and preparation for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, mid-2001 to January 2003
225.  On 5 June, Mr Blair and Secretary Rumsfeld agreed that the future of Iraq
would be an important issue for the international coalition.
226.  Secretary Rumsfeld visited London for talks with Mr Blair and Mr Hoon on 5 June.
Mr Blair expressed concern about the possible unintended consequences of any military
action. He and Secretary Rumsfeld agreed that the future of Iraq would be an important
issue for the international coalition.127
227.  On 14 June, Mr Chaplin visited Washington with Mr Charles Gray, the Head of
MED.128 The British Embassy reported that US interlocutors from the NSC and State
Department had confirmed that the US was “pressing ahead with trying to prepare the
Iraqi opposition for regime change” and that Congressional funding had been agreed
for the State Department’s Future of Iraq Project (see Box below), a series of working
groups under Iraqi opposition ownership to look into issues of governance after Saddam
Hussein’s departure.
228.  In response to a US suggestion that successful regime change depended on
a clear strategy for the day after, Mr Chaplin proposed that the UK and US should
“exchange views on scenarios”.
229.  That exchange took place in Washington on 6 November and is described later
in this section.
The Future of Iraq Project
In October 2001, the US State Department began work on what became known as the
Future of Iraq Project.129 The project was launched publicly in early 2002. It involved a
series of working groups of Iraqi exiles and officials from the State Department, each
looking at an area of importance to Iraq’s future, including justice, education, the economy,
infrastructure, the environment and reform of government institutions.130 The objective was
to expand the scope of US post-war planning and provide a common focus for competing
exile groups.
The Future of Iraq Project worked independently of the US inter-agency planning process.
It developed parallel proposals for post-invasion Iraq that did not contribute to the official
US planning effort. According to Hard Lessons:
“The richly developed reports constitute the single most rigorous assessment
conducted by the US Government before the war. Although the findings … did not
amount to an operational plan … [they] contained facts and analysis that could – and
in some cases did – inform operational planning.”131
127  Letter Rycroft to Watkins, 5 June 2002, ‘Prime Minister’s Meeting with Rumsfeld, 5 June: Iraq’.
128  Telegram 802 Washington to FCO London, 14 June 2002, ‘Iraq: UK/US Talks, 13 June’.
129  The National Security Archive, Electronic Briefing Book No. 198, 1 September 2006, New State
Department Releases on the “Future of Iraq” Project.
130  Bowen SW Jr. Hard Lessons: The Iraq Reconstruction Experience. U.S. Government Printing
Office, 2009.
131  Bowen SW Jr. Hard Lessons: The Iraq Reconstruction Experience. U.S. Government Printing
Office, 2009.
151
Previous page | Contents | Next page