UK memo says US, UK readying Iraqi withdrawal-report
LONDON, July 10 (Reuters) – A leaked document from Britain’s Defence Ministry says the British and U.S. governments are planning to reduce their troop levels in Iraq by more than half by mid-2006, the Mail on Sunday newspaper reported.
The memo, reportedly written by Defence Minister John Reid, said Britain would reduce its troop numbers to 3,000 from 8,500 by the middle of next year.
“We have a commitment to hand over to Iraqi control in Al Muthanna and Maysan provinces (two of the four provinces under British control in southern Iraq) in October 2005 and in the other two, Dhi Qar and Basra, in April 2006,” the memo was reported to have said.
The memo said Washington planned to cut its forces to 66,000 from about 140,000 by early 2006.
“Emerging U.S. plans assume 14 out of 18 provinces could be handed over to Iraqi control by early 2006,” the memo said.
The United States is training Iraqi forces to take over the country’s defence in the face of an insurgency involving allies of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and foreign militants allied to al Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
But critics say Iraqi troops are not ready to take charge of security in their country.
“There is, however, a debate between the Pentagon/Centcom, who favour a relatively bold reduction in force numbers and the multi-national force in Iraq, whose approach is more cautious,” read the memo.
Reid said in a statement in response the article:
“We have made it absolutely plain we will stay in Iraq for as long as is needed. No decision on the future force posture of UK forces has been taken.
“We have always said it is our intention to hand over the lead in fighting terrorists to Iraqi security forces as their capability increases.
“We therefore continually produce papers outlining possible options and contingencies. This is but one of a number of such papers produced over recent months covering various scenarios. This is prudent planning.”
The United States and Britain have the two largest contingents of foreign forces in Iraq and the memo described the impact a reduction of U.S. and British forces might have on other allied troops.
“The Japanese will be reluctant to stay if protection is solely provided by the Iraqis. The Australian position may also be uncertain.”
The memo said reducing British troop levels in Iraq would save about 1 billion pounds ($1.74 billion) per year.
Is this to be believed? Aren’t they afraid this will be seen as appeasing the terrorists after the London attacks? The pro-war sure played that card after the Madrid attacks last year.
See our last post on Iraq.
another possible conclusion
Could this be taken as an indication of how much they believe their own propaganda, rather than how soon they expect to leave Iraq? Maybe the US and UK governments really do think that the insurgency isn’t going to last much longer, or that there will be by then a strong Iraqi force to take care of things. It would be interesting to know what the people who wrote the memo expected things to be like in Iraq by 2006. The memo probably would not be telling us anything new if the people who wrote it expected things to get better in a year.