Defence committee: British troops in Iraq face 'nightly suicide missions'

· MPs told by soldiers that role in Basra is over· US influence blamed for government strategy Richard Norton-Taylor
Wednesday July 25, 2007
The Guardian
British soldiers are going on "nightly suicide missions" in southern Iraq and they are there only at the behest of the US, Labour MPs on the Commons defence committee told the government yesterday.
In evidence that reflects deepening concern among army commanders, the MPs said they were told during a recent visit to British troops in Basra that the UK's military role in Iraq was over.
They painted a dark picture of the security situation in the city, with Iraqi forces inadequately trained, and infiltrated by Shia militia and criminal gangs. The view appeared to be shared yesterday by Bob Ainsworth, the new armed forces minister also just back from a visit to southern Iraq, and by Brigadier Chris Hughes, the Ministry of Defence's senior officer responsible for military commitments.
Kevan Jones, a Labour member of the committee, said British troops were going on "nightly suicide missions", attacked every night as they delivered supplies to the British garrison at the Basra Palace in the centre of the city. "We have a force surrounded like cowboys and Indians in the Basra Palace," he said.
He and other Labour MPs said British troops in Basra told them that the only reason they were staying in southern Iraq was "because of our relations with the US". Mr Jones questioned whether that was "a price worth paying".
Willie Rennie, a Liberal Democrat member of the committee, suggested British troops were there just because of "American domestic sensibilities". Mr Ainsworth replied that Britain was a "sovereign nation" but it was also part of a US-led coalition in Iraq.
Washington wants Britain to maintain a substantial military presence in southern Iraq to try and limit domestic pressure for cuts in the number of American troops in Iraq, as well as to protect convoys taking supplies to US troops and help police the border with Iran.
Mr Ainsworth said that neither the Iraqi police nor the Iraqi army were able to guarantee security in the region. Brig Hughes told the MPs that an Iraqi general had told him some police officers were "totally incompetent". Mr Ainsworth added: "We cannot hand over to a vacuum."
Ninety per cent of attacks in Basra were against British troops, the committee heard. The attackers, said Mr Ainsworth, included "patriotic youth", a "huge criminal element", and militias supplied with weapons by Iran.
He said: "There is clear evidence of malign influence across the border [with Iran] in the Basra area. There is little doubt, when you look at some of the munitions being used to kill our people, they are not being made in garages in downtown Basra. They are coming from outside the area."
However, ministers have said British troops will soon hand over the Basra Palace to the Iraqis. That will leave British troops with one base, beside the airport, attacked recently by rockets fired from the Basra suburbs.
The job of British troops will be to "overwatch" Iraq forces, helping them in the event of a crisis.
To do that, Mr Ainsworth said, the number "couldn't get much below" 5,000, the number they will reduced to in the next few months. He would not be drawn on when Britain would pull out of Iraq, saying only that "we are not planning to stay in the numbers we are in south-east Iraq over the long-term".
One Labour member of the committee privately expressed concern yesterday that British soldiers could get sucked in to urban guerrilla warfare.
Brig Hughes told the committee it was not appropriate to talk about a "victory" in Iraq. He said: "I think it's been quite a long time since anyone has talked about victory in Iraq." Mr Ainsworth told the MPs that it was "essential to talk to the Iranian government" about security in southern Iraq.
· The following correction was printed in the Guardian's Corrections and clarifications column, Thursday July 26 2007. We wrongly described Willie Rennie as a Labour MP in the article above. He is a Liberal Democrat. This has been corrected.