Previous page | Contents | Next page
6.5  |  Planning and preparation for a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, January to March 2003
Potential international partners for reconstruction and additional Coalition
partners to provide security continued to make their post-conflict
contributions conditional on UN authorisation for Phase IV.643
1440.  Despite being aware of the shortcomings of the US plan,644 strong US
resistance to a leading role for the UN,645 indications that the UN did not want
the administration of Iraq to become its responsibility646 and a warning about the
tainted image of the UN in Iraq,647 at no stage did the UK Government formally
consider other policy options, including the possibility of making participation
in military action conditional on a satisfactory plan for the post-conflict period,
or how to mitigate the known risk that the UK could find itself drawn into a
“huge commitment of UK resources” for which no contingency preparations had
been made.
The planning process and decision-making
1441.  As a junior partner in the Coalition, the UK worked within a planning
framework established by the US. It had limited influence over a process
dominated increasingly by the US military.
1442.  The creation of the AHGI in September 2002 and the IPU in February 2003
improved co-ordination across government at official level, but neither body
carried sufficient authority to establish a unified planning process across the four
principal departments involved – the FCO, the MOD, DFID and the Treasury – or
between military and civilian planners.
1443.  Important material, including in the DFID reviews of northern and southern
Iraq, and significant pieces of analysis, including the series of SPG papers
on military strategic thinking, were either not shared outside the originating
department, or, as appears to have been the case with the SPG papers, were not
routinely available to all those with a direct interest in the contents.
1444.  Some risks were identified, but departmental ownership of those risks, and
responsibility for analysis and mitigation, were not clearly established.
1445.  When the need to plan and prepare for the worst case was raised, including
by MOD officials in advice to Mr Hoon on 6 March 2003,648 Lt Gen Reith in his
paper for the Chiefs of Staff on 21 March649 and in Treasury advice to Mr Brown
643  Paper FCO, 25 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Phase IV Issues’.
644  Minute Drummond to Rycroft, 19 March 2003, ‘Iraq Ministerial Meeting’.
645  Minute Ricketts to Private Secretary [FCO], 7 February 2003, ‘Iraq Strategy’.
646  Public hearing, 15 December 2009, page 5.
647  Paper Middle East Department, 12 December 2002, ‘Interim Administrations in Iraq: Why a UN-led
Interim Administration would be in the US interest’.
648  Minute Sec(O)4 to PS/Secretary of State [MOD], 6 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Aftermath – Medium to Long
Term UK Military Commitment’.
649  Minute Reith to COSSEC, 21 March 2003, ‘Phase IV Planning – Taking Stock’.
563
Previous page | Contents | Next page