Previous page | Contents | Next page
9.4  |  June 2005 to May 2006
452.  President Bush set out his strategy for Iraq in a speech to the US Naval Academy
in Annapolis on 30 November.212
453.  The British Embassy Washington commented that he had invoked the spirit of
Churchill and Roosevelt: the US objective in Iraq was “nothing less than complete
victory”. He had acknowledged the validity of debate but said that an “artificial timetable”
would be wrong. President Bush had anticipated US troop reductions as Iraqi forces
stood up, but had avoided timelines.
454.  In parallel with the President’s speech, the National Security Council published its
“National Strategy for Victory in Iraq”.213
455.  The strategy set out three stages of victory in Iraq:
“– Short term, Iraq is making steady progress in fighting terrorists, meeting political
milestones, building democratic institutions, and standing up security forces.
– Medium term, Iraq is in the lead defeating terrorists and providing its own security,
with a fully constitutional government in place, and on its way to achieving its
economic potential.
– Longer term, Iraq is peaceful, united, stable, and secure, well integrated into the
international community, and a full partner in the global war on terrorism.”
456.  The strategy was “conditions based” and did not set a date by which it would be
achieved because:
“No war has ever been won on a timetable and neither will this one.”
457.  The strategy said that US force posture would change with conditions in Iraq.
It was expected that some changes in posture would take place over the following year
“as the political process advances and Iraqi security forces grow and gain experience”.
458.  At the FCO’s request, the JIC considered the relationship between Iran and Iraq
on 30 November.214
459.  The Assessment reiterated earlier JIC judgements that the Iranian leadership
aspired to:
“… help create a stable and unified Iraq which is Shia-led with a strong Islamic
identity; open to Iranian political and commercial influence; unable to pose a
military threat and inclined to defer to Iran over issues of mutual interest; and free of
significant Western influence.”
212  eGram 19675/05 Washington to FCO London, 1 December 2005, ‘Iraq/US: Bush’s speech and the
public debate’.
213  National Security Council, November 2005, ‘National Strategy for Victory in Iraq’.
214  JIC Assessment, 30 November 2005, ‘Iran and Iraq’.
565
Previous page | Contents | Next page