Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.5  |  Planning and preparation for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, January to March 2003
“Second UNSCR and clear humanitarian mandate.” DFID would want to be
“positively engaged” with the UK military, US humanitarian effort and the UN.
It would also “consider bilateral operations in any UK sector”, but commitments
to UN agencies across Iraq and the region would “severely financially constrain
what we could do in a UK-controlled sector with the UK military and other
partners”.
“Second UNSCR, clear humanitarian mandate and additional resources.”
With adequate finances, DFID “would be able to play the exemplary role
suggested by the Prime Minister”. Without, DFID could discuss with the MOD
what the exemplary role might entail, but could not plan for it “without more
comfort on resources”.
646.  Dr Brewer stated that DFID staff were committed to advising the MOD and Armed
Forces in all circumstances and that MOD-DFID links were now strong. DFID was also
doing “scoping work” on the role it might play if there were a UN mandate:
“But we do not currently have political authority to deploy operationally, or to
make substantive plans to deploy in an exemplary role (eg commissioning or
pre-positioning material). Our Secretary of State has made our financial position
clear in two letters to the Prime Minister.”
647.  Dr Brewer’s letter illustrated the absence of an agreed UK approach to the
provision of humanitarian relief, highlighting the gap between DFID’s focus on
supporting the UN, Red Cross and NGOs across Iraq and the UK military’s focus
on the humanitarian situation in its Area of Operations (AO) in the South.
648.  MOD officials expressed growing concern about UK preparations for the
delivery of humanitarian assistance and longer-term reconstruction in the South.
649.  On 26 February, Mr David Johnson, Head of the MOD Iraq Secretariat, expressed
concern to Mr Hoon’s Private Office about humanitarian assistance during the early
stages of military conflict.280 The MOD and DFID believed US plans for humanitarian
assistance were inadequate, in particular because they relied on delivery by NGOs,
which would not be there in numbers early on. The UK military would therefore need:
“… immediate access to sufficient expertise and resources to … make good the
deficiencies in the US plans. In particular … DFID experts deployed in theatre, who
can advise what is actually required … (as opposed to soldiers making it up as they
go along) … There are lead-times associated with this … Waiting till after a second
SCR is leaving it too late. We know DFID haven’t got any money. That is why they
need to ask for some, now.”
280 Email sec(O)-Iraq to sofs-ps [MOD], 26 February 2003, ‘Humanitarian Assistance’.
425
Previous page | Contents | Next page