Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
124.  In January 2007, the divergence between US and UK strategies was thrown into
sharp relief by President Bush’s announcement that the US would adopt a new strategy,
of which a prominent feature would be the deployment of a surge of US forces, primarily
to Baghdad and its environs. UK assessments of the prospects for the new US policy
were bleak, reflecting widespread pessimism about the prospects for Iraq. UK strategy
continued to look towards withdrawal.
125.  US concerns about the differences in approach were evident. In February 2007,
Sir David Manning, British Ambassador to the US, reported that Secretary Rice had
asked him “to tell her honestly whether the UK was now making for the exit as fast
as possible”.39
126.  The divergence in strategies was also illustrated by the conditions-based process
through which the four provinces in MND(SE) were transferred to Provincial Iraqi Control
(PIC) during 2007. Although each transfer was signed off by senior members of the US
military, there was persistent reporting of US concerns about readiness for PIC, whether
the conditions had actually been met and the wider impact of transfer.
127.  The US was also uncomfortable about arrangements made by the UK with a militia
group in Basra which allowed the safe exit of UK troops from their main base in the city
(see Box entitled ‘Negotiations with JAM1 in Basra’).
A possible civil war
128.  By March 2006, senior members of the UK military were considering the possibility
of civil war in Iraq, prompted by rising levels of sectarian violence and concerns that the
Iraqi Government was “not … perceived as even-handed in security issues”.40 The risk
of civil war had been acknowledged by Prime Minister Ibrahim Ja’afari in the wake of the
bombing of the al-Askari mosque in February. Although there was general agreement
that the situation in Iraq did not constitute civil war, the risk that one might develop was
considered to be real.
129.  At this time, the presence in Iraq of the MNF was authorised by resolution 1637
(2005). The exchange of letters between Prime Minister Ja’afari and the President of the
Security Council which accompanied the resolution clearly identified providing security
for the Iraqi people as the reason why a continued MNF presence was necessary.
130.  In late April, FCO officials were concerned that security in Basra was declining and
that a determined and sustained effort, including a more assertive military posture, would
be required to deliver the UK’s objective of transferring Basra to Iraqi control by late
2006 or early 2007.
39  Letter Manning to Hayes, 1 February 2007, ‘Conversation with the US Secretary of State,
31 January 2007’.
40  Minute Houghton to CDS, 5 March 2006, ‘SBMR-I Weekly Report (201) 5 March 06’.
492
Previous page | Contents | Next page