Previous page | Contents | Next page
9.8  |  Conclusions: The post-conflict period
131.  Accounts from mid-2006 suggested that security in MND(SE) was a significant
concern, characterised by “steady, if generally unspectacular, decline”41 and increased
militia activity. The UK military’s approach had generated US concern and the security
situation was limiting UK civilian activity.
132.  Gen Jackson’s assessment in May of the short-term security prospects in Iraq
was bleak. He judged that “what we will leave behind will not look much like strategic
success. Ten years hence our strategy may fully bear fruit.”42
133.  After visiting Iraq in early May, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, Chief of the
Defence Staff, advised Dr Reid that there should be no change to the operational
approach and that there were “compelling reasons” why the UK should “press on”
with handing over security to Iraq, including to permit the UK’s continuing build-up in
Afghanistan.43 ACM Stirrup identified the risk that UK withdrawal from Basra would be
seen as a “strategic failure” and suggested that “astute conditioning of the UK public
may be necessary” to avoid that.
134.  ACM Stirrup’s view that the UK should press ahead with drawdown despite the
security challenges in Basra was not consistent with Government policy that withdrawal
should be conditions-based.
135.  ACM Stirrup’s acceptance that the “law of diminishing returns” was “now firmly in
play” and that there was “an increasing risk” that UK forces would “become part of the
problem, rather than the solution” had some validity: it was clear from accounts of the
situation in Basra that UK forces were not preventing a steady decline in security. ACM
Stirrup was also right to advise Dr Reid that the MNF in Iraq faced a “multifaceted”,
sophisticated and dangerous enemy; that serious issues remained in Basra (militia
activity, poor governance, insecurity); and that it was possible the UK would be accused
of strategic failure.
136.  The established policy was that UK forces would withdraw as the capabilities of the
ISF increased until responsibility could be handed over to the Iraqi Government. ACM
Stirrup’s proposed remedy of continued drawdown and managing public opinion did not
mitigate the risk of strategic failure he described.
137.  In the summer of 2006, in recognition of the need to stabilise Basra and prepare
it for transition to Iraqi control, the UK developed the Basra Security Plan, “a plan to
improve Basra through operations, high impact reconstruction and SSR [Security Sector
Reform] … lasting for up to six months”.44 The military element of the plan became
known as Operation SALAMANCA and included operations against militia groups.
41  Minute senior government official specialising in the Middle East to Dowse, 12 May 2006, ‘Situation
in Basrah’.
42  Minute CGS to CDS, 22 May 2006, ‘CGS visit to Iraq: 15-18 May 06’.
43  Minute Stirrup to SofS [MOD], 8 May 2006, ‘CDS Visit to Iraq and Afghanistan – 5-7 May 06’.
44  Minute Burke-Davies to APS/Secretary of State [MOD], 24 August 2006, ‘Iraq: Op SALAMANCA’.
493
Previous page | Contents | Next page