Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
22.  Mr Day considered that the UK had a number of motives for entering into a dialogue
with JAM:
to contribute to the coalition’s overall outreach effort to groups involved in
violence, in line with what was happening with Sunni groups further north;
to encourage mainstream JAM (who it was believed were “looking for a way out
of violence”) to move towards a commitment to democracy, particularly with the
provincial elections expected in 2008;
to drive a wedge between the mainstream JAM core (who were nationalists and
believed to be “reconcilable”) and the largely Iranian-sponsored JAM Special
Groups (who were following an Iranian agenda);
to encourage a reduction in the level of violence, to make time for the Iraqi
Army to develop its capability to enable it to confront the unreconciled militias
successfully; and
to reduce the threat to UK and other coalition forces.
23.  The process of seeking Ministerial agreement for continued dialogue with
an individual (JAM1) was interrupted by the formation of the new government
(see Section 9.5), and had to be re-started in early July.
24.  On 2 July, an official working closely with the military reported:
“HMA [the British Ambassador to Iraq] and SBMR-I … judge that US and GoI
[Government of Iraq] will reject the deal.
“To summarise a lengthy and detailed discussion: SBMR-I repeated that he could
see some of the opportunities offered by [JAM1]. As such he would like to be able
to write supportive comments on a submission. But as the submission currently
stood – he would have to comment that he did not believe that either the GoI nor US
would support the proposal. He was concerned that this would lead to Ministers not
agreeing the submission, and would like to avoid this if possible.”15
25.  Although he could see the benefits of reducing indirect fire (IDF) and allowing
transition to PIC to happen, US views reportedly remained a major concern for
Lt Gen Lamb because:
“… such a deal in the South would represent an about-turn of the policy that had
only months ago convinced them to establish [another operational body]. In short the
suggestion of a no-strike agreement in the South was at loggerheads with the active
targeting policy conducted against Iranian proxies by MNF-I [Multi-National Force –
Iraq] and MNC-I [Multi-National Corps – Iraq] elsewhere in Iraq.”
15  Minute official working closely with the military, 2 July 2007, ‘New [NAME OF OPERATION]
Submission: […]’.
186
Previous page | Contents | Next page