Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
backing is uncertain. The willingness and ability of the ISF to take on the JAM is also
in doubt.”
108.  The JIC assessed that the strength of JAM was uncertain. MNF estimates placed
it at 10,000 active supporters plus 20,000 sympathisers who could be mobilised rapidly.
Capabilities varied.
109.  On 27 July, the Iraq Policy Unit (IPU) responded to Mr Patey’s valedictory telegram:
“We agree that, in the face of the challenges you describe, our best course is to hold
our nerve and stick broadly to our current strategy. We should resist the argument
that the right response to the current difficulties is to plan to prolong our military
presence. To do so would only entrench the dependency culture we are working to
wean Iraq off, and rob us of an acceptable exit strategy.”72
110.  On 27 July, the Iraq Strategy Group (ISG) reflected on reporting from Baghdad,
and its implications for the existing strategy.73 The Group agreed that, although success
or failure in Baghdad would be critical to overall campaign success in Iraq and was
therefore the coalition’s highest priority, the “best way for the UK to contribute to the
wider military campaign was to continue to focus our limited resources on MND(SE),
in particular, on Basra”.
111.  But in Basra:
“The extent to which … the Iraqi Government would allow us to be robust was
a concern.”
112.  The ISG agreed that the UK should:
“… press the Iraqis and US to maintain momentum of security transition … More
broadly, we should firmly resist any US suggestion … that the current problems
meant that we should put more resources into Iraq, and plan to stay longer. Sending
this message risked perpetuating the current Iraqi dependency culture, and robbing
us of any perspective74 of military withdrawal in an acceptable timeframe. We
recognised, however, that the success of this strategy would depend entirely on the
readiness of the Iraqi security forces to take over the job. We would need to make
a critical judgement on this in the autumn.”
113.  Mr Martin Dinham, DFID Director, Europe, Middle East and the Americas, proposed
that the UK should focus its future support to Iraq on central government – in particular
on budgetary management and critical economic reform – as the security situation
72  eGram 32790/06 FCO London to Baghdad, 27 July 2006, ‘Iraq: Reply to your Valedictory’.
73  Minute Cabinet Office [junior official] to Sheinwald, 27 July 2006, ‘Iraq Strategy Group, 27 July’.
74  The Inquiry believes that this is a drafting error and should read ‘prospect’.
22
Previous page | Contents | Next page