Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
193.  Mr Straw explained that:
“Our lawyers are working urgently with the Americans to concert positions on the
legal basis for ORHA’s activity, making clear that this is essential to our longer-term
commitment.”
194.  Mr Straw reiterated Lord Goldsmith’s advice that the UK must be able to veto
ORHA activities, especially in areas controlled by UK forces. He also stated that:
“We would need to reconsider our involvement if the US tried to use it [ORHA]
to impose radical restructuring in the absence of UN authorisation.”
195.  The UK’s need for an MOU containing “clear ground rules” was reinforced by
Mr Brenton to Mr Bellinger in Washington.97 In response to US concerns that an MOU
could be misinterpreted as a “secret pact”, Mr Brenton advised that “there was a real
political need for the MOU in London”.
196.  Mr Bellinger also observed that the US administration had not yet decided between
the omnibus and “smaller chunks” approaches to the new Security Council resolution.
197.  On 15 April, a DFID official visiting Iraq reported to Ms Short that ORHA was
“failing; and incapable of delivering to our timeframes”.98
198.  At the meeting of the AHMGIR on 16 April, Ms Short reported that a recent DFID
mission to consider further support for ORHA had reported “serious organisational
weaknesses”.99 She would discuss it with the team on their return.
199.  At the same meeting, Mr Hoon commissioned urgent advice on whether the UK
should lead one of ORHA’s regional offices.100
200.  Later that day, the IPU produced a note on the issue. The note again described the
UK’s legal concerns, including that “we might be regarded as responsible for Coalition
actions in areas where there are no UK forces present”.
201.  The IPU’s advice was to defer any commitment until the practical implications had
been fully understood.
202.  In his statement to the Inquiry Maj Gen Cross wrote:
“… it had become very clear to me that there were still serious concerns relating
to potential political and legality issues. The only clear instructions I received
throughout this period therefore was that I should not commit the UK to financial
or any other responsibilities which might tie us into any ORHA plans.”101
97  Telegram 504 Washington to FCO London, 15 April 2003, ‘US/Iraq: Phase IV’.
98  Minute PPS to Secretary of State [DFID], 15 April 2003, ‘Foreign Secretary/Tim Cross meeting’.
99  Minutes, 16 April 2003, Ad Hoc Group on Iraq Rehabilitation meeting.
100  Minute Drummond to Manning, 16 April 2003, ‘Iraq: Support for ORHA Regional Office’ attaching
Note IPU, 16 April 2003, ‘Iraq: ORHA Regional Offices’.
101  Statement Cross, 7 December 2009, page 18.
162
Previous page | Contents | Next page