Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
1043.  The JIC reported that Coalition Forces continued operations against Muqtada
al-Sadr’s forces in Karbala and Najaf throughout May, but had not yet gained control of
Najaf. Negotiations continued but were judged by the JIC to be “slow, opaque and so far
fruitless”. Growing local opposition was reported in Najaf.
1044.  On Fallujah, the Assessment said:
“The Fallujah Brigade is a local expedient. Unless integrated into the Iraqi national
forces’ structure, it risks entrenching sectarian division in the forces creating
problems downstream for the new Iraqi government and the Coalition.”
1045.  Maj Gen Stewart requested additional troops to provide both force protection and
a mobile reserve in southern Iraq.586
1046.  On 25 May, Mr Hoon’s Private Secretary wrote to Mr Rycroft setting out the
rationale for the request. He wrote:
“Irrespective of the decisions we reach on the commitment of UK forces to Southern
Iraq as a whole … We should meet this request.”
1047.  Taken alongside the planned withdrawal of another battalion, Maj Gen Stewart’s
request amounted to a net increase of around 550 UK troops. The request was made
“against the background of the recent difficulties … particularly around al-Amara”.
1048.  The letter reported Mr Hoon’s view that this request should be separate from
consideration of the broader US request to take responsibility for additional provinces.
1049.  Mr Hoon’s Private Secretary wrote a second letter to Mr Rycroft on 25 May,
explaining the advice of the Chiefs of Staff on the US request for additional UK troops.587
1050.  In view of the pressure that the additional deployment would put on the Armed
Forces, the Chiefs recommended staging the reinforcement, deploying first the HQ
ARRC and ensuring that there was a brigade ready to deploy if required, but holding it
back until absolutely necessary.
1051.  The letter also suggested that it could prove difficult to explain the additional
deployment, both to Parliament (which might doubt whether the numbers involved
were sufficient to achieve the strategic effort required) and to the Armed Forces more
widely, given “the starkly conflicting messages of an increase in commitment, alongside
the emergent view in the public domain of sizeable adjustments downwards in our
force structures”.
586  Letter Naworynsky to Rycroft, 25 May 2004, ‘Iraq: Reinforcement and Re-roling of MND(SE) Units’.
587  Letter Naworynsky to Rycroft, 25 May 2004, ‘Iraq: options for a UK military contribution to the wider
South’.
378
Previous page | Contents | Next page