Previous page | Contents | Next page
9.5  |  June 2006 to 27 June 2007
The CIG judged that the insurgents in Anbar had proved resilient and that support for
their insurgency was undiminished:
“Large areas of Anbar are outside effective MNF or Iraqi Security Forces (ISF)
control. In several towns and in rural areas insurgents are able to operate freely.
Where the MNF has an established presence, or patrols frequently, the insurgents’
ability to exert control is less.”
628.  The CIG considered the ability of the Iraqi Government to assert its authority in the
province and judged that:
“Central government’s influence in Anbar is weak. The provincial authorities send
the right signals about economic and security problems, but they have been able
to deliver little. Local administrative capacity is very limited and dogged by tribal
rivalries. Living conditions across the province remain poor.
“There is little prospect of improvement in security. In a particularly hostile
environment, the Iraqi Security Forces will require MNF combat support beyond
2007, or risk ceding de facto control of further large areas to the insurgents.”
629.  The CIG Assessment concluded:
“Prospects for the Anbar tribal groups fighting AQ‑I will depend on their gaining
broader support among the Sunni population. We judge this will prove difficult as
long as rival tribal and insurgent groups compete for local power and influence.
More broadly, most Anbaris have no confidence in local political structures or in
Maliki’s Shia‑dominated government and its efforts at national reconciliation.”
630.  An official working closely with the military discussed proposals for Shia outreach
briefly with Lt Gen Lamb on 27 February and explained that the “main effort was to
bring a limited number of high quality interlocutors to the table”, including JAM1.329
Lt Gen Lamb was happy with what was proposed and content for the plan to proceed
with JAM1.
631.  According to a JIC Assessment dated 31 October 2007, negotiations began in
March 2007.330
632.  SIS3 told the Inquiry that the dialogue with JAM1 was borne of opportunism.331
633.  Lieutenant General Sir Graeme Lamb told the Inquiry that he was not personally
involved in the cease‑fire negotiations, but “became aware of a dialogue which became
established between the military, between [officials working closely with the military]
329  Email official working closely with the military, 27 February 2007, ‘[NAME OF OPERATION]/JAM
Outreach’.
330  JIC Assessment, 31 October 2007, ‘Iraq: Risks to the Negotiations with JAM in Basra’.
331  Private hearing, 2010, page 60. Based on redacted material.
117
Previous page | Contents | Next page