8 FUTURE COMMITMENT TO IRAQ
247. Estimating the force levels which MNF-I will
have to maintain for the remainder of 2005 and further into the
future is difficult. The Prime Minister and the Secretary of State
have made it clear that the UK contribution to MNF-I will remain
as long as the Iraqi Government welcomes it. Currently, around
9,000 British troops are deployed in Iraq.[248]
General Houghton described the circumstances surrounding the deployment:
At the moment we have 8,700 deployed to ground,
that includes 400 from the EHRR that went out in order to provide
the additional cover for the election period. We would hope that
by the end of February they would be recovered bringing that figure
down by another 400.[249]
The Prime Minister told the Liaison Committee: "What
we always say is that we will remain in Iraq for as long as is
needed".[250]
Coalition forces are, of course, present in Iraq at the invitation
of the Iraqi Government. Legally, UNSCR 1546 stipulates that the
mandate of the MNF-I "shall be reviewed at the request of
the Government of Iraq or twelve months from the date of this
resolution". The resolution was passed on 8 June 2004 and
thus expires on 8 June 2005 unless renewed. It is likely to be
renewed.
248. Testifying before the US Senate Armed Services
Committee, Deputy Secretary of Defence Paul D Wolfowitz said the
United States had decided to reduce the level of US forces in
Iraq in the course of March 2005 by 15,000 troops, down to about
135,000. But these reductions should be seen in light of previous
increases in the run-up to the elections. The US Army expects
to keep its troop strength in Iraq at about 135,000 for at least
two more years, according to Lieutenant General James J. Lovelace
Jr, the US Army's Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations. General
Lovelace told reporters on 26 January 2005 that the assumption
of little change through 2006 represented "the most probable
case".[251] This
was confirmed to us during our visit to Washington in March 2005;
when we were also told that significant progress in Iraq by the
summer of 2006 would be critical if President Bush's second term
of office was to be seen as a success.
249. A number of countries, however, are planning
to withdraw their troops in the course of 2005. Ukraine's contingent
is set to withdraw. Portugal confirmed on 17 January 2005 that
it would withdraw its contingent of 120 military police after
seeing through its pledge to help provide polling-day security.
More importantly, Poland, the Netherlands and Hungary are withdrawing
their forces. The Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, has
also announced that Italy, which is the fourth largest contributor
to MNF-I, intends to begin withdrawing its troops from Iraq in
September 2005. These withdrawals will affect the force levels
in MND (SE) and MND (SC). Unless other countries come forward
to replace them, they will have to be covered either by the United
States, or the United Kingdom. In MND (SE), the UK has already
made provisions to cover for the Dutch. The Secretary of State
announced that additional troops were to be deployed in Al Mutana
Province.
250. As well as covering for the withdrawing Dutch
forces, and perhaps the forces of other countries too, there will,
from time to time, be a need to increase levels either because
security conditions deteriorate or because special events, such
as the elections, require a greater force presence. In the run-up
to the 30 January 2005 elections, the 1st Battalion Royal Highland
Fusilliers deployed to Iraq.
251. Pressure on the US and the UK to increase the
total number of personnel in Iraq could therefore mount. Australia
has recently increased its Iraq deployment by an additional 450
troops to assist in replacing Dutch troops and protect Japanese
troops engaged in humanitarian work. A number of smaller countries,
such as Georgia and Romania, also intend to increase their troop
contributions, although there is no sign that France, Russia and
Germany will participate in MNF-I. MoD seems confident at present
that these pressures will not necessitate further UK troop deployments.
Mr Howard told us that at the moment the MoD did not have
any plans for major changes either downwards or upwards in force
numbers: "I think in overall terms we certainly would not
anticipate any significant increase in force levels".
[252]
252. General Rollo told us that he had been satisfied
with the number of forces at his disposal:
It was not a major issue for me; I felt I had
enough people. What did occur during the time I was there was
that the task evolved. We started focusing on security assistance;
we had to take people off that in August to deal with al-Sadr's
people and then gradually over September, October, November we
were able to take people out and put them back into the training
task which was really our main effort in improving the Iraqi forces.
I am sure that direction will continue into the New Year.[253]
253. The Minister for the Armed Forces told us similarly
that there were no plans to increase force levels considerably:
"No, we have no plans to do so. What we have done, as we
have announced, in terms of the Dutch and the Dutch withdrawal,
we have taken on a contingent responsibility there".[254]
254. The state of the Iraqi infrastructure is poor.
We saw for ourselves the water, power and oil shortages and the
defunct nature of the port infrastructure at Umm Qasr. Substantial
private investment is needed to improve the situation. However,
with an unstable security situation there is little to attract
private investment at present. No company is going to risk its
shareholders money until the situation is settled and, very importantly,
is going to stay settled for the length of time needed to realise
the returns to make an investment worthwhile. Until such time
as the private sector is confident that this security can be provided
by the Iraqi Security Forces, British troops are likely to be
invited by the Iraqi Government to stay in Iraq. This may be a
substantial period of time.
255. In light of the state of the insurgency and
the condition of the Iraqi Security Forces, and subject to the
continuing agreement of the Iraqi Government, it seems likely
that British forces will be present in Iraq in broadly similar
numbers to the current deployment into 2006. We support this commitment
and believe that calls for a withdrawal of British forces are
premature. Experience has taught us that, if nation-building exercises,
such as that in Iraq, are to succeed, they must have a serious
commitment of time, energy, financial resources and political
resolve.
256. We do not reach this conclusion lightly. Operations
in Iraq will continue to be dangerous. There is a very real risk
that British forces will suffer further casualties. We need always
to remember when this happens that these are individual men and
women, who have families and friends in the UK. As a country we
owe them a great debt for the commitment, loyalty and courage
which they display on behalf of us all.
257. In February 2005 we pressed the Minister for
the Armed Forces to improve the financial compensation provided
to the families of those killed on operations.[255]
We welcome the Government's announcement that the lump sum
benefits under the existing Armed Forces pension scheme are to
be at least doubled.[256]
We also welcome the announcement in the Budget that compensation
payments for injured serving personnel will not be taxed in future.
We regret, however, that these changes are effective only from
6 April 2005. We urge MoD to consider making them retrospective
to the start of combat operations in Iraq. Many thousands
of our Armed Forces have served in Iraq since 2003, and 85 have
given their lives in the course of that service. We do not believe
that their families should be treated differently simply because
of the date on which they were killed
248 As of 18 February 2005, in addition to the UK and
US, the contributions were Italy (3116), Netherlands (1368), Denmark
(485), Lithuania (131), Czech Republic (102), Romania (747), Japan
(536), Bulgaria (495), Mongolia (130), Poland (2500), Slovakia
(105), Ukraine (1589), Albania (74), Kazakhstan (29), Macedonia
(34), Azerbaijan (154),Estonia (47), Latvia (117), El Salvador
(380), South Korea (3700), Australia (282), Armenia (46). Norway
retains 9 staff officers in Multinational Division South East.
Ev 127 Back
249
Q 327 Back
250
Liaison Committee, 8 February 2005, HC 318-i, Q 9 Back
251
'Army Plans To Keep Iraq Troop Level Through '06: Year-Long Active-Duty
Stints Likely to Continue', Bradley Graham, Washington Post, 25
January 2005 Back
252
Q 324 Back
253
Ibid Back
254
Q 543 Back
255
Q 538 Back
256
Ev 150 Back
|
