US-led coalition 'unprepared'

2005-03-24 09:16

London - The United States-led coalition was unprepared for the insurgency that has swept Iraq since the end of the war and made a series of mistakes in post-conflict planning, a parliamentary committee said in a report published on Thursday.

The House of Commons Defence Committee said the coalition should have given greater priority to training Iraqi security forces immediately after the invasion.

It said Iraqi personnel were still unable to take responsibility for securing the country and Britain's 8 000 troops were likely to remain in Iraq until at least 2006.

"It would be catastrophic for the Iraqis if we upped and left them to deal with a whole series of insurgencies," said committee chairman Bruce George, who is a legislator in Prime Minister Tony Blair's Labour Party.

"We have a legal and moral obligation to remain as long as we are required to remain," he said.

The government said it would study the report carefully and respond in due course.

The committee said the coalition should have secured Iraq's border to stop an influx of foreign fighters, particularly from Syria and Iran, and should have secured arms dumps, which were a ready source of weapons for insurgents.

"It is difficult to avoid concluding that the coalition, including British forces, were insufficiently prepared for the challenge represented by the insurgency," said the report, which echoes the findings of other parliamentary committees which have probed the war.

"We also believe that the coalition should have foreseen that its presence would be resented by some Iraqis, particularly Sunni Arabs and some Shia nationalist elements, and portrayed as cultural and economic imperialism."

The report praised the work of British troops in southern Iraq and said their "professionalism and sensitivity" had helped reduce the scale of the insurgency in their sector.

The committee was critical however, of the tactics employed by the multinational force, which is led by the United States.

"We urge the Ministry of Defence to use its influence to affect MNF-I's posture and approach," the report said, without specifically naming the United States.

George declined to elaborate on what the report meant by "posture and approach" and said he could not comment on US military tactics, as his committee had only visited the American sector once.

British officials have privately complained that the US military is too heavy handed in Iraq, compared with British soldiers, who often patrol on foot and in berets instead of helmets in an effort to win the trust of local Iraqis.

The committee was optimistic about progress made in Iraq, however, and said the January elections marked a turning point for the country.

"Progress in many aspects is impressive," George said. - AP

- SAPA