Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
483.  Although the media were reporting disagreements between the UK and US about
what the UK’s force posture should be in MND(SE), that was not the reality; discussions
with both the US and Iraqi governments were continuing. The UK was currently
conducting an assessment of the impact of Op SINBAD, after which the UK would take
a decision on what needed to be done in the future.
484.  On security in Basra, Mr Browne stated:
“… the murder rate had reduced from over 100 to less than 30 a month, which
compared favourably with a number of European States and American cities. The
kidnap rate had been halved and polling suggested levels of confidence in security
which would be welcome in the UK; 90 percent of those polled felt more secure than
a year ago; only 2 percent had encountered intimidation in the last six months.”
485.  The restoration of marshland by the military, DFID and the Iraqi Government had
been described as “the most significant and successful restoration of the environment
and lifestyle in the history of the world”.
486.  On 25 January, Mr Asquith reported a series of discussions he and Lt Gen Lamb
had held with Gen Casey and Lieutenant General Raymond Odierno, Commander
Multi‑National Corps – Iraq, over the preceding 48 hours about transition plans for
Basra.261 He reported that they thought:
As Iraq’s second city, Basra had a key role to play in the country’s regeneration.
It could not afford to become (pre‑ or post‑PIC) “another al‑Amara” in which
Western contractors could not operate, thereby making redevelopment
impossible. The situation post‑PIC needed to parallel that of Dhi Qar or Najaf,
where the PRT could operate effectively with reasonable security protection.
In addition to reconstruction work, there would still be a need for police training
post‑PIC. Gen Casey had recently observed problems in al‑Amara, where the
MNF were unable to visit police stations in the centre of town, requiring the IPS
to visit MNF on the city perimeter. He ascribed this to the UK’s re‑posturing in
September 2006 which meant the withdrawal from all bases in the city.
A key benchmark for PIC was that the threat from armed groups should be low
and expected to remain so following PIC. The US view was that neither Maysan
nor Basra had yet passed that test.
Although both Generals had received several briefings on the UK plans as they
evolved, neither had yet seen a fully worked through set of options. That was
clearly essential.
487.  Mr Asquith commented that it would be necessary for UK plans to demonstrate that
it would be possible for MNF to move around the city (including post‑PIC) along the lines
of Dhi Qar. It would also be important for the plans credibly to demonstrate that the UK
261  eGram 3125/07 Baghdad to FCO London, 25 January 2007, ‘Iraq: Basra: Handling the US’.
90
Previous page | Contents | Next page