https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/75dd7afc1440800973adc547d73fbcb7.pdf ba20002d1e4d14cb6ebee0bb123ae323 PDF Text Text Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur I'acces a /'information ALLIES’ CONTRIBUTIONS FOR A POTENTIAL INTERVENTION IN IRAQ BRIEFING NOTE AIM To provide a summary of selected contributions, firm and conditional, to an American-led intervention in Iraq. Our data are compiled from open sources and, therefore, may be freely used in public forums. Whenever possible, these data have been checked against classified information to ensure their general accuracy. BACKGROUND United States Diplomatic efforts to achieve UN-sponsored disarmament of Iraq are approaching a stalemate and an American -led military intervention seems very likely in weeks, if not in days. As of March 14, 2003, an estimated 230,000 American personnel are deployed in the Gulf region, while 30,000 additional troops are en route. Although Washington has frequently expressed readiness to fight Saddam on its own, it has approached almost 50 countries for potential troop and other contributions. So far, only the UK has indicated that it would join US-led offensive operations in Iraq. Many U.S. allies have units deployed in the area serving in various missions. However, most of the allies, to a lesser or greater extent, remain reluctant to commit troops or treasure to a possible intervention. FIRM AND CONDITIONAL COMMITMENTS NATO Allies Belgium: The government has not offered any comments on potential Belgian participation in an intervention in Iraq, but has stated that it aims to concentrate its military assets on the missions in Afghanistan and Africa. Czech Republic: Prague has deployed its anti-chemical warfare unit to Kuwait. The Czech government is also considering providing other troops, such as a field hospital or a rapid reaction brigade. Denmark: Denmark is prepared to offer a submarine and troops were the UN to authorize an intervention in Iraq, but the government has not yet decided whether Danish soldiers would be sent into combat. France: France favours allowing for a longer and more thorough arms inspection process and has frequently indicated that it might use its Security Council veto to oppose a military action against Iraq. 1 000049 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur I'acces a /'information Germany: Germany allowed the U.S. to use its airspace and bases, but has indicated that it would commit no troops to an intervention against Iraq. Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder asserted on January 21, 2003, that Germany would not vote for, nor go to war under any circumstances. However, in order to help contain any Iraqi threat Germany has deployed two Patriot missile units to Israel and one to Turkey, and its servicemen will serve on board of the AW ACS. A German anti-chemical warfare unit has been in Kuwait since 1991. Hungary: Budapest has authorized the training of Iraqi exiles at Taszar military base in Hungary. American troops are training between 1,000 and 4,000 Iraqi opposition members primarily as translators and scouts. Hungary will send 2,000 gas masks and chemical protection suits to Turkey. Italy: Rome is willing to support the coalition indirectly, by allowing the use of air space and military bases. Netherlands: Government sources have indicated that Dutch participation, if any, would likely be limited to ships already in the region. On February 7, 2003, ahead of the NATO decision, the Dutch government decided to deploy, on a bilateral basis, three Patriot missile units for the protection of Turkey. Norway: The Norwegian PM has indicated that there would have to be a clear UN mandate before Norway would even consider joining an intervention in Iraq. Poland: On January 16, 2003, Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski stated that his country supports the U.S. intervention against Iraq and has promised to contribute troops to a possible war with Baghdad. Portugal: Portugal allowed the U.S. to use its airspace and bases. Spain: The Spanish government has repeatedly said it would back a US-led military intervention in Iraq, but has given no details of troop commitments. Turkey: Turkey would provide an excellent staging ground for an attack from the north were an international coalition to intervene in Iraq. The Turkish cabinet has agreed to allow 62,000 American combat troops and over 300 aircraft to use their territory. However, the Turkish parliament narrowly failed to endorse this agreement on March 1, 2003, but a second vote on the issue may be held soon. Turkey has had a few thousand troops in Northern Iraq since the early nineties. Reportedly, Ankara has been deploying troops along the border with Iraq. Some reports indicate that Turkey could contribute between 10,000 and 50,000 troops if the U.S. were to attack from the north. UK: Over 1,300 naval and air force personnel are already in the Gulf, serving in various missions, including the enforcement of no-fly zones over Iraq, and London is also offering its military bases in England and Diego Garcia for U.S. long-range bombers and tanker aircraft. 2 000050 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Documen t divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur I'acces a I'information On January 7, 2003, despite reported divisions in the Blair government, London called up 1,500 reserve personnel and dispatched to the Gulf an amphibious naval task force including at least 3,000 marines. This task force consists of the amphibious ship HMS Ocean, destroyers HMS Edinburgh and HMS York, supply ships Argus, Fort Rosalie, Fort Austin, landing and logistic ships Sir Galahad, Sir Tristram, Sir Percivale, and anti-mine ships HMS Grimsby and HMS Ledbury. The UK also sent 14 combat aircraft to previously scheduled exercise in Jordan. On January 12, 2003, Britain also sent to the region a carrier naval taskforce comprised of the aircraft carrier Ark Royal, the destroyer HMS Liverpool, the frigate HMS Marlborough, the supply ship Fort Victoria, the tanker Orange Leaf, and a few submarines. On January 20, 2003, Britain announced a major deployment to the region of an additional 26,000 troops. These troops consist of Headquarters 1 (UK) Armoured Division, 7th Armoured Brigade, 16th Air Assault Brigade, and 102 Logistics Brigade. This deployment includes 120 Challenger tanks and 150 Warrior armoured personnel carriers, as well as mobile artillery units. These troops will be stationed in Kuwait by the middle of February. On January 30, 2003, London called up another 4,500 reserve personnel. On February 6, 2003, London announced sending additional 7,000 RAF personnel to the Gulf as well as 75 aircraft, including 27 Puma and Chinook helicopters, Jaguar and Tornado reconnaissance aircraft, E3D Sentry airborne command aircraft, Hercules transporters, VC10 and Tristar refuelling aircraft, Tornado F3's for air defence, Tornado GR4 and Harrier GR7 offensive jets. In all, Britain has decided to deploy 42,000 troops to the Gulf, including 29,000 ground troops. Other Like-Minded Countries Australia: The Australian government has dispatched forces to the Persian Gulf as part of contingency arrangements for a possible war against Iraq including a contribution of Special Forces, three warships, a squadron of up to 14 F/A-18 Hornet fighters, three C130 Hercules transport aircraft, a P3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft, CH-47 helicopters, and an air-to-air refuelling aircraft. On January 22, 2003, the government announced a forward deployment to the region of the amphibious transport ship Kanimbla, lead elements of a Special Forces Task Group, and a Royal Australian Air Force reconnaissance team. On February 7, 2003, Australia sent another 450 troops to the Persian Gulf. In all, Australia could reportedly deploy 2,000 troops there. Canberra prefers to have a new Security Council resolution authorizing an attack on Iraq, though it does not believe that a new resolution is necessary. Slovakia: Slovakia has deployed a 75-member contingent to complement the Czech antichemical warfare unit already deployed in Kuwait. Bulgaria: The parliament decided to make available a 150-member anti-chemical warfare unit and to allow the United States to use Bulgaria’s airspace and one base. 3 000051 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur I'acces a /'information Romania: The parliament agreed to make available 278 non-combat troops and to allow the United States to use Romania’s airspace and bases. Albania: The cabinet decided to make available a commando unit and to allow the U.S. to use Albania’s airspace. Ukraine: The government is negotiating with Kuwait on the status of the decontamination battalion, which can be sent to the area. Middle Eastern Countries Israel: The current U.S. position is that Israel should not be part of the coalition against Iraq. The Israeli government has clearly stated, however, that it would launch aerial counter attacks if attacked. Syria: Most likely would remain neutral and eventually may grant the use of its air space for search and rescue missions. Iran: Most likely would remain neutral and eventually may grant the use of its air space for search and rescue missions. Jordan: Most likely will offer radar and special operations bases, but is unlikely to say so publicly. Saudi Arabia: Most likely will offer airfields, and sites for anti-missile batteries. More than 3,000 Saudi troops have deployed in Kuwait as a part of a Persian Gulf regional force. Kuwait: Kuwait would be one of the primary staging grounds for an attack from the south. Oman: U.S. troops already use air bases for maintenance and refuelling. Oman deployed one battalion as a part of a Persian Gulf regional force to help defend Kuwait. United Arab Emirates: U.S. troops already use air bases for refuelling. The United Arab Emirates intend to deploy tanks, attack helicopters, warships and about 4,000 troops as a part of a Persian Gulf regional force to help defend Kuwait. Bahrain: U.S. troops already use port facilities. Bahrain is the headquarters for the U.S. 5th Fleet. Bahrain government said that it was sending a frigate and ground troops as a part of a Persian Gulf regional force to help defend Kuwait. Qatar: U.S. troops already use several military bases. Qatar is the forward HQ for U.S. Gulf forces. It was also the locale for exercise “Internal Look,” simulating an attack on Iraq, in December 2002. 4 000052 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur I'acces a /'information POTENTIAL CONTRIBUTIONS FOR AN INTERVENTION IN IRAQ Military Air forces bases Ground troops Navy Financial contribution Postconflict deployment NATO Countr es UK* Not needed Not needed Not needed No___ Yes Yes Yes Not needed Not needed Not needed Yes Yes Most likely Yes U.S.* Yes Australia* Not needed Belgium* Czech Republic* Denmark* France* Germany* Hungary Italy*______ Netherlands* Norway* Poland* Portugal Spain* Turkey* No No No No No No 361 troops No Yes Likely Considering Considering Considering Considering Considering No No No No No No No No No No No_______ No_______ No_______ No_______ Considering No_______ No_______ No_______ No_______ Considering Likely Likely No______ Likely Considering No No No No Likely No No Considering No Considering No_______ Considering Most likely No_______ Considering Most likely No_______ Considering No No_______ Considering No Likely Considering Most likely Yes Most likely Yes Yes Yes Likely Yes Likely 2 aircraft carrier taskforces 600-1,000 100,000 to 5 to 6 aircraft 150,000 aircraft carrier troops taskforces Like-Minded Countries 3 ships 10-20 150 troops (special aircraft forces) 75 troops No No 100-140 aircraft 29,000 troops Not Slovakia* _____ needed * Countries that have forces in the region serving in other missions. Responsible Group Principal: Prepared by: Date: Dr. Kenneth J. Calder, ADM (Pol), 992-4358 Dr. Nebojsa Bjelakovic, DG Pol Plan/D Strat A, 992-4532 14 Mar 03 5 000053 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context CDIQ00022 Title A name given to the resource Allies' Contributions for a Potential Intervention in Iraq (Briefing Note) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 14-Mar-03 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG24-G-31, Accession 2012-00351-6, Box 20, File 1812D-18-8, Library and Archives Canada Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource A-2022-100289 LAC Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Canadian Crown Subject The topic of the resource Iraq Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Canada Declassified Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource PDF Language A language of the resource en