Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.5  |  Planning and preparation for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, January to March 2003
784.  Although there was no guarantee at that stage that a UN mandate along the
lines sought by the UK would be forthcoming, Mr Blair stated that planning for
“medium-term post-conflict action” should continue on the assumption that there
would be a UN mandate.
785.  For the first time, Mr Blair requested a consolidated UK plan for post-conflict
Iraq, including the key decisions for Ministers to take.
786.  DFID and the MOD remained unable to agree a joint approach to UK
humanitarian operations in the area likely to be occupied by UK forces.
787.  After Cabinet on 6 March, Mr Blair chaired a meeting on post-conflict issues
with Mr Brown, Mr Hoon, Ms Short, Baroness Symons, Sir Michael Jay and “other
officials”.337
788.  The IPU prepared an annotated agenda in consultation with other departments.338
789.  With the invasion possibly only weeks away, the IPU explained that US and UK
planning assumed that, in the “medium term after the conflict”, Coalition Forces would
be “re-deployed into six or seven geographical sectors in order to provide a secure
environment for the civil transitional administration to conduct humanitarian assistance
and reconstruction work”. The US expected the UK Division in Iraq to be responsible for
a geographical sector (see Section 6.2), which would be very expensive and carry wider
resource implications. The UK Division would probably be based in or near Basra, with
the size of its AOR depending on a number of factors, including the permissiveness of
the environment and the size of the Division in relation to the rest of the Coalition.
790.  The annotated agenda stated: “Ministers need urgently to take a view on this
before the military planning assumptions become a fait accompli.” Ministers were asked:
Whether they agreed that the UK did not have the resources to make an
“exemplary” effort in providing for basic humanitarian needs in the area
controlled by a UK Division. The potential cost of making a “significant
difference” in a UK AO likely to contain 20 percent of Iraq’s population was
estimated at between US$400m and US$2.4bn for the first year, depending on
disruption to OFF and the extent of the damage caused by conflict. That was
“well beyond” the financial and implementing capacity of DFID and the MOD,
and could become a significant medium-term commitment if the local population
became dependent on UK assistance. The alternative to an “exemplary effort”
was to “give our assistance to UN agencies and NGOs”, supplemented by
support for QIPs in the UK’s area.
To choose between options for a medium-term post-conflict military presence.
The Chiefs of Staff believed it would be necessary to reduce the UK’s military
337 Letter Cannon to Owen, 7 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Post-Conflict Issues’.
338 Paper IPU, 5 March 2003, ‘Planning for the UK’s role in Iraq after Saddam’.
451
Previous page | Contents | Next page