Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.4  |  Planning and preparation for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, mid-2001 to January 2003
462.  On post-conflict commitments the paper stated:
“The likely post-conflict scenarios and demands have yet to be clearly articulated.
Scenarios include immediate and catastrophic regime collapse, the mounting of an
internal coup as the campaign commences, or at the opposite end of the spectrum
an exhausted Iraq suing for peace. Each of these will require a different response.
The infant US inter-agency process has just started to identify the means by which
transition to a post-Saddam regime might take place. This commences with a
CENTCOM-led military government.”
463.  In the section headed “Conflict vs Post-conflict”, the SPG asked whether, if UK
forces were to participate in the military campaign, “our effort should be against the need
to meet US short-term planning for combat, or the equally demanding and pressing need
for preparations for the post-conflict phase”. It continued:
“Conflict phase. Commitment to this phase may carry with it inherent risks with
regard to post-conflict engagement with little choice on role, timing, location, or
future extraction. An alternative approach that offers a UK lead, or UK participation in
the post-conflict phase may be equally attractive to the US as our commitment to a
land role in the conflict phase.
“Post-Conflict. Given the wide range of possible post-conflict scenarios these forces
would have to be combat capable forces at high readiness, and in all probability
with key elements forward deployed during the conflict phase. The length and scale
of our post-conflict commitment will determine our ability to fulfil a range of other
operations, and most notably our Balkan commitment. An enduring medium scale250
commitment in Iraq would preclude continued medium scale engagement in
the Balkans.
“Strategic Balance. We are currently committed to two medium scale land operations
(FRESCO251 and the Balkans), and a land commitment to Iraq at anything above
small scale252 will commit us to three medium scale land operations. Although with
a full Package 3253 commitment to the conflict phase we retain the SLE [Spearhead
Land Element], our ability to deploy and sustain even a small scale force package
has yet to be determined, and anything above this Scale of Effort will be impossible
… Recovery and recuperation will also be key to our judgements as to which phase
to commit to. Hard and fast judgements are not possible, however, commitment of
Package 3 will have an effect for at least two years.”
250  Defined in the 1998 Strategic Defence Review as “deployments of brigade size or equivalent” for war-
fighting or other operations, such as the UK contribution in the mid-1990s to the NATO-led Implementation
Force (IFOR) in Bosnia.
251  The use of military forces to provide cover in the event of a strike by the Fire Brigades’ Union.
252  Defined in the 1998 Strategic Defence Review as “a deployment of battalion size or equivalent”.
253  The most ambitious of the four options and the only one involving the deployment of UK land forces
(to northern Iraq).
189
Previous page | Contents | Next page