Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
893.  Coalition Forces remained in place in Fallujah although Mr Richmond reported that
“military action is not imminent”. It was hoped that:
“… if the citizens [of Fallujah] gained confidence, they would be able to put pressure
on the extreme elements”.
894.  Maj Gen Stewart told the Inquiry that the impact of events in Fallujah had been
significant among the Shia community in Southern Iraq.493 At Friday prayers the
dominant issue had been the need to raise money for fellow Iraqis in Fallujah, because
what was happening there was “way beyond the pale”.
895.  Sir Nigel Sheinwald told the Inquiry that:
“It wasn’t just that we were worried about the proportionality of the tactics that were
used or about the perception in the international and Iraqi media of what went on. It
was also that it happened at the same time as American action on the Shia side to
which the Shia reacted very violently … Ultimately the strategic threat was a loss of
Shia consent.”494
896.  Sir David Richmond told the Inquiry that the change in US stance as April
progressed was not exclusively because of the UK. Action in Washington, threatened
resignations from the GC, and the position of Mr Brahimi all had an influence.495
897.  By mid-April, the Coalition had regained control of nearly all the towns that had
been taken by JAM, leaving Muqtada al-Sadr’s forces restricted to the cities of Najaf,
Kufa and parts of Karbala, which were then the focus of millions of Shia Pilgrims
observing the Muslim holiday of Arba’een.496
898.  After reading briefing given to him in advance of meeting President Bush, Mr Blair
expressed concern to Sir Nigel Sheinwald about the security situation in Iraq and the
problems facing the CPA in implementing its main programmes and policies.497
899.  Sir Nigel commissioned 15:
“… unvarnished accounts of where things stand, with as much local colour as
possible; and with clear recommendations, where appropriate, for how to improve
things … The Prime Minister is conscious that implementation of these programmes
depends on the Americans, in Iraq and in Washington. It is therefore essential that
departments in London should ensure that their opposite numbers in Washington
are aware of our concerns, and that we work with them to produce credible plans for
improving performance.”
493  Public hearing, 9 December 2009, page 71.
494  Public hearing, 16 December 2009, pages 51-52.
495  Public hearing, 26 January 2011, page 22.
496 Allawi AA. The Occupation of Iraq: winning the war, losing the peace. Yale University Press, 2007;
Sanchez RS & Phillips DT. Wiser in Battle: A Soldier’s Story. HarperCollins, 2008.
497  Letter Sheinwald to Adams, 19 April 2004, ‘Iraq’.
352
Previous page | Contents | Next page