Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.5  |  Planning and preparation for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, January to March 2003
1310.  Mr Lee told the Inquiry that the question of whether the post-conflict period
carried too much uncertainty to risk embarking on the conflict had never been asked
in those terms:
“… however much you intellectually or analytically describe the wider campaign,
psychologically the focus is on the conflict itself. A certain amount of … optimism,
hope, creeps in in respect of the aftermath. That will be sorted out, and there are too
many things unknown there to do too much more planning. Therefore you go ahead
and hope that you’ve got enough of a structure which can then be supplemented by
ad hoc arrangements afterwards, and therefore it will all be sorted out.
“I think, as we know, in practice it turned out to be a lot more difficult than we thought
at the time.”
1311.  Several witnesses highlighted the breakdown in US inter-agency
co‑ordination as a significant obstacle to effective planning.
1312.  Mr Straw described it as “the fundamental problem”.
1313.  In his statement, Mr Blair wrote:
“There was interaction at every level between the UK and the US system. Some
of that, as evidence to the Inquiry makes clear, was unsatisfactory, due mainly
to inter‑agency issues in the US. It is correct also that the shift from the State
Department to the Department of Defense in January 2003 made a difference.
The shortcomings of the US planning have been well documented and accepted.
Our own planning was complicated both by the difficulties of being fully inserted into
the US system and the fact that the planning was taking place against the backdrop
of fast-changing political and military plans.”551
1314.  Mr Straw went further in directly attributing difficulties with UK planning to the
situation in the US. He told the Inquiry that “a significant number of the problems we
faced … could have been avoided by better planning and co-ordination, above all
in Washington”.552 The UK “got caught up in internal administration politics”, but that
“didn’t become completely clear until after the invasion”.553
1315.  Mr Straw concluded:
“… the fundamental problem … was not a lack of planning in London … [but] the
breakdown in co-ordination in Washington between the Department of Defense and
the State Department”.554
551 Statement, 14 January 2011, page 14.
552 Public hearing, 21 January 2010, page 15.
553 Public hearing, 8 February 2010, page 104.
554 Public hearing, 8 February 2010, page 107.
543
Previous page | Contents | Next page