Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.4  |  Planning and preparation for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, mid-2001 to January 2003
The longer dislocation lasts, particularly if there are major terrorist incidents, the
greater the likelihood of real disruptive challenges emerging. The extent to which
military operations have public support is also important. A strong patriotic factor will
restrain disruption and increase tolerance of minor inconveniences.”
893.  The CCS formed a number of other “key judgements”:
Oil price rises would be the main economic factor. “General uncertainty” would
affect the stock market and, possibly, domestic consumer spending. Tourism and
air travel would be affected by dislocation of routes.
The potential for further protests by anti-war groups and ethnic groups and
counter-demonstrations would increase. There was “opportunity for violent
confrontations between protest groups, ethnic groups, or targeted against ethnic
groups, particularly in the aftermath of a major terrorist incident”.
The firefighters’ dispute would probably go ahead.
Heightened anxiety about terrorist attacks was likely to cause increased
disruption from hoaxes and false alarms. The JIC assessed that the threat from
Al Qaida and Islamic extremist groups remained “high”. “Al Qaida and other
Islamic extremists will seek to exploit the circumstances of a war situation”.
Military resources would be unavailable to cover industrial action contingencies
other than the firefighters’ dispute. A call up of medical Reservists would
probably affect NHS provision.
894.  The CCS stated that contingency planning by departments was in hand. In many
cases, existing contingency plans were “adaptable to the circumstances arising from
operations against Iraq”.
895.  The CCS paper continued to be updated until January 2003, when the AHGI
established a Domestic Impact Sub-Group overseen by Mr Jonathan Stephens,
Treasury Director Public Services, supported by the CCS (see Section 6.5).432
DFID engagement with Whitehall
896.  In late November and early December 2002, DFID officials lobbied for a
cross-government exercise to cost each of the military options being considered
by the UK, and to include humanitarian costs.
897.  During December, DFID officials also sought, with some success, to improve
official-level co-ordination with the MOD and the rest of Whitehall on humanitarian
issues.
898.  In a meeting with DFID officials on 18 November, Ms Short expressed concern that
not only was no money set aside for humanitarian actions, but that the issue was not
432  Letter Stephens to Phillips, 20 January 2003, ‘Iraq: Domestic Implications of Military Action’ attaching
Paper [draft] Civil Contingencies Secretariat, 17 January 2003, ‘Potential Impact on UK of Operations
Against Iraq’.
263
Previous page | Contents | Next page