Previous page | Contents | Next page
9.6  |  27 June 2007 to April 2008
to the possibility of a more rapid UK military withdrawal than they would wish
for, while recognising the need to maintain our long term close relationship
with the US”;
if the UK was likely to have a military presence in Iraq in 2009, officials should
insert themselves into US negotiations with the Iraqis to secure adequate legal
cover post-resolution; and
notwithstanding the plans for a military drawdown, the UK should maintain areas
of political and economic engagement “where we could continue to add value in
order to maintain our reputation and relations with the Government of Iraq, as
well as with the US”.452
915.  The FCO short-term strategy paper looked at the options for drawing down UK
troops in Iraq; the civilian and military tasks that the UK could continue to undertake; and
assessed the impact of a diminishing UK contribution on the UK’s reputation.453
The FCO identified options for military withdrawal as:
Withdraw by May 2009: “do the benefits of leaving early (less risk to life,
cutting our losses in an environment where it is proving difficult to achieve
objectives) balance the risk of serious damage to our global reputation (including
accusations that after five years in Iraq the UK mission had failed) and to our
relationship with the new US President?”
Withdraw in late 2009, but no announcement of a decision until the new
US Administration was in office: “should we maintain the costs of staying
(financially/in asset resource terms, risk to life, political risk (including over
legal basis), risks posed by increasing insecurity in Basra) into 2009 in order to
protect the UK’s reputation and relationship with the new US Administration?”
Withdraw in late 2009, but release Basra Air Station for economic development
by the Iraqis earlier and move a “smaller transitional force” to the Iraqi Army
base at Shaibah: “does reconfiguring our forces in this way enable us to
withdraw forces from Iraq by the end of 09 in a more effective way? Can civilian
effect, including delivery on the Prime Minister’s Economic Initiatives, be
delivered during 09 if UK forces reconfigure in this way? Would the extra costs
of developing Shaibah [Logistics Base] be justified?”
Stay on indefinitely, with around 3,000 troops at Basra Air Station, in order
to provide continued support for the ISF, a secure platform for political and
economic work and “to protect the UK’s relationship with the new US President”:
“do the costs of remaining (financially/in asset resource terms, risk to life,
political risk) without a timeframe for withdrawal balance the benefits we would
gain from a continued presence (possible political, security, economic progress;
reputational (staying the course); better relations with the new President)?”
452  Paper Cabinet Office, 31 March 2008, ‘Iraq’.
453  Paper FCO, March 2008, ‘Iraq: The Short Term’.
351
Previous page | Contents | Next page