As the debate over whether to commit troops alongside American forces intensified, senior military officials urged ‘extreme caution’ over any moves towards war, saying that British servicemen faced being bogged down in a perilous open-ended commitment in Iraq.
Claiming that the Government had yet to give any clear political direction over committing troops - America has asked for up to 25,000 UK personnel to form part of an Iraq invasion force - the sources also warned that Arab countries were likely to rebel over any Western attack on Iraq unless a Middle East peace deal could be struck.
Without such a commitment, the sources said, it was unlikely that Saudi Arabia would allow its bases to be used against Saddam Hussein. Defence sources said that, without Saudi co-operation, it would be difficult to launch a sustained attack on Iraq using American and British land forces.
Underlining their fears of a military strike, senior figures in the armed forces will warn the Prime Minister this week that without a leader-in-waiting to take over from Saddam, there is little chance of any moves to overthrow the Iraqi dictator being successful.
Opposition forces in Iraq are not as strong as they were in Afghanistan, Blair will be told. There does not appear to be any leader waiting in the wings that both the West and Iraq’s Arab neighbours could agree to.
As it became clear that British troop commitments in Afghanistan would have to be extended beyond the April deadline set by the UK’s Prime Minister, the briefings revealed the level of concern over further military deployment against Saddam.
Although Blair has insisted no decisions have been taken on future action, the British Foreign Office officials have also said it was unlikely that America would be satisfied with simply sending United Nations weapons inspectors back to Iraq.
Such a belief suggests that increased military strikes are the only option being seriously considered by President George Bush. He said last week that ‘inaction was not an option’.
In a further sign of British military anxiety, leaked British Ministry of Defence (MoD) papers reveal the Army is warning that it will need a substantial increase in this summer’s Comprehensive Spending Review if it is to take on a new military campaign.
The briefing, prepared for General Sir Michael Walker, Chief of General Staff, warns future funding for defence ‘remains very taut, given the range of operational tasks placed on the MoD and armed forces’, adding that matching the defence programme to these tasks ‘remains a very significant challenge’.
If the government expects the armed forces to take on additional tasks as part of the campaign against terrorism, ‘then the resources for those tasks will have to be found’. It is believed that the MoD has asked for a 500 million pounds sterling settlement in next month’s Budget to pay for its increased commitments.
The papers also reveal that British peacekeeping troops will stay in Afghanistan longer than expected, raising fears of the Army becoming embroiled in yet another long-running commitment overseas, which will drain resources.
The UK, which leads the international peacekeeping force in Kabul and has committed more than 5,000 troops, is due to hand over control of the force to Turkey next month.
‘This does not preclude our troops remaining beyond that point,’ the briefing says, although it is too early to say how many would remain.
The Government has already begun its battle to win ‘hearts and minds’ in the second phase of the war on terror.
At the European summit in Barcelona, Blair refused to be drawn on action against Iraq, an issue which has caused tensions among EU members. He said that as it was not yet time for any decisions to be made, there was no need to discuss the issue.—Dawn/The Observer News Service.