Dying A Dream - the UK / Iran War 2006 (My first TL)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Longer update today:

10 - And so it begins...

Got a friend who's a pure bred killing machine, think he might be dead by Christmas

The morning of 4th April 2006 will live in history as the moment the war really started. At about 7:00am local time a British patrol boat near the Iranian maritme border was hit and sunk by a single anti-ship missile, killing all those on board[1]. It has never been established whether or not the boat actually entered Iranian waters, and all documents relating to the incident remain classified. The incident was clearly an act of war, and the world waited for Britain's response.

The most immediate reaction was in the oil market, where the price, which had risen steadily since the crisis started, spiked to nearly $95 per barrel[2]. Although it didn't sustain that price for long, closing at around $80, investors were clearly spooked.

Within an hour of the attack the British foregin secretary, Jack Straw, asked the Speaker to recall parliament from it's Easter recess to debate a motion giving the house's support to a declaration of war[3]. The motion was passed at 10pm, with only a handful of Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs voting against it.

Within an hour of the vote British planes based in Southern Iraq launched airstrikes on Iranian anti-ship missiles and Air defences on the coast. A number of missile sites were destroyed in the attacks, but at a price. Two British planes were shot down over the Iranian coast, both pilots ejected safely, but were captured by Iran.

The immediate retaliation by Iran was to launch medium range missiles at British bases in Iraq. For the most part these attacks were not all that succesful, although they did manage to take at least one runway out of service for a day or two. Iranian troops also attempted to cross the Iraqi border at two locations, near oil facilities. In both cases they were driven back by British and Iraqi forces. A total of 5 British soldiers were kiled in the
battles and, it's believed, up to 25 Iranians (Iran never officially released casualty figures).

The US publicly called on both sides to agree an immediate ceasefire, however behind the scenes they were supporting the British.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOPSECRET/CABINET ONLY
...IN AN EFFORT TO AVOID MORE SEVERE ESCALATION WE CANNOT CURRENTLY PROVIDE DIRECT MILITARY SUPPORT. HOWEVER WE ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE COVERT INTELLIGENCE AND LOGISTICS SUPPORT SHOULD IT BE REQUIRED...

-From a memo from the US to Britain, de-classified after the war.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Britain also recieved a request by Israel to be allowed to use Iraqi airspace for an unspecified mission, widely believed to be an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, but were refused. Israel has never admitted to sending such a request, and only the British documents were leaked.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECRET/ISRAELI GOVT. ONLY
RE: OPERATION DELILAH.[4]

...DUE TO POSSIBLE CONFUSION AND POTENTIAL INCOMPATABILITY BETWEEN BRITISH AND ISRAELI IFF AND OTHER SYSTEMS IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO ALLOW ISRAELI PLANES THE USE OF IRAQI AIRSPACE AT THIS TIME OR IN THE FORSEEABLE FUTURE...

from a memo sent to Israel from Britain, on the 6th of April 2006, leaked (with some portions redacted) in 2010

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]This is based partly on the incident that happened in 2007 in OTL when 15 sailors were detained by Iran and later released only after the whole thing caused mass embarrassment to the British government.

[2]The average oil price in April 06 in OTL was $62.50 according to a quick google search. Clearly here the price is higher here because of the crisis, but it's still a big jump.

[3]Not strictly necessary, but after Iraq it seems reasonable that they would do it for the avoidance of any doubt.

[4]Given Israel's so called "Samson Option", it seems a fitting name for a mission to stop someone else getting that ability, although we can assume that it's solely an internal name, because if it crossed my mind it would have crossed everyone else's too.
 
Sorry for the delay in the update, but I've been busy with uni stuff.

11 - Continuation

Goodbye, blue sky

When Iran paraded the captured RAF pilots on Iranian TV on April 7th it only served to anger the British more, and in fact over the following days the air campaign was increased in intensity, although the vast majority of targets were still on the coast and the Iran / Iraq border. This allowed Iran to retaliate to some degree, as their main medium range missile bases were not targeted for the most part, although some were hit with cruise missiles. Iranian missiles were aimed mostly at British bases in Iraq, but one or two were fired at oil facilities in Southern Iraq. This caused the oil price to rise above $100 per barrel by the end of the week.

Was went unknown to the oil speculators, and indeed the British to start with, was that Iran made clear to the US that it would not attack oil installations outside of Southern Iraq, as long as the US remained nuetral. The US government went along with this to begin with, although tentatively. They did not stop sharing intelligence with Britain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECRET/US ONLY
...WE WISH TO MAKE CLEAR THAT IT IS NOT OUR INTENTION TO ATTACK NUETRAL OIL FACILITIES. AS LONG AS THE UNITED STATES AND OTHERS DO NOT GET INVOLVED IN ANY MILITARY ACTION AGAINST IRAN.

-From a diplomatic cable sent to the US by Iran. It wasn't initially shared with the UK. Leaked 2011.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

In addition to mostly leaving oil facilities alone, shipping was mostly left untouched by both sides, although an Iran Iranian patrol boat did attack a British destroyer, killing 3 crew and wounding a number of others before being driven away.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
interesting update I wonder how long it will be before any land campaigns start because without the USA I doubt Britain get really remove the regime in Tehran
 
interesting update I wonder how long it will be before any land campaigns start because without the USA I doubt Britain get really remove the regime in Tehran

Yeah, the lack of a ground campaign is intentional on the part of the UK, because they know that without the US helping they have little chance of overthrowing the Iranian regime.
 
12 - Home Front

I'm guarding the home of the Home Guard...

From the beginning of the war the British government had been attempting to guage just how much of a threat was posed by Iranian sleeper cells and Iran-supporting terrorists, without a huge amount of success. It was announced on the 11th of April that the security services were monitoring the threat, but that they didn't have any specific information about a planned attack[1]. In response to this percieved increase in risk the government announced that they would reintroduce the idea of 90 day detention for terrorist suspects. This was mostly accepted as necessary by the House Of Commons, although it caused disquiet among some human rights groups.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHAT PRICE A FREE COUNTRY?

- Headline in The Independent on 13/4/06 after the government announcement that they would reintroduce 90 day detention.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The war had mostly settled down into a cycle of airstrikes by Britain and missile retaliation by Iran by this point, however there were still occasional battles on the Iran / Iraq border. Most notably on the 15th of April when 5 British soldiers and a number of Iranians were killed in a battle over an oil terminal. It was decided to increase the number of British troops in Iraq, at the expense of Afghanistan, partly in light of this incident.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 90 day thing was always going to be controversial, even after MI6 said that they were a bit worried about Iranian agents. Of course, it was Shami [Chakrabati] and the usual suspects who were most vocal, but I think most of the public as a whole were in favour[2]...

...A few of us in the cabinet were at least slightly against the idea of moving troops from Afghanistan to Iraq, especially since Iran also shares a border with Afghanistan. We agreed in the end though that it was necessary, especially if America wasn't going to help directly.


- Harriet Harman, My rise and fall, an autobiography, published 2013.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Terrorism Act 2006 (Amendment) Act was passed on the 20th of April, after a relatively smooth passage through parliament. It has since been claimed by some that the government exaggerated the threat level in order to pass the law, although a lot of the claims rely on conspiracy theories. The most vocal opponents of the law were indeed Liberty and similar groups, who announced a rally against it for the 20th of May, to co-incide with a Stop The War Coalition rally that had been announced prior to the war starting.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]They always seem to say that, which does beg the question of why they say it.

[2]That's delusional, at best.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Seldrin

Banned
I must say that this is a brilliant TL so far, I can't recall a single instance in which a similar idea was posed, please continue, I can't wait to see how this will effect British Foreign relations, with an emphasis on the EU of course.
 
I'm really liking this TL. What was the state of Iraqi forces in the region at this point in time? Will they play a combat active role supporting the UK in operations against Iran?
 
Last edited:
I must say that this is a brilliant TL so far, I can't recall a single instance in which a similar idea was posed, please continue, I can't wait to see how this will effect British Foreign relations, with an emphasis on the EU of course.

Thanks. The PoD came to me pretty randomly lol. Funnily enough Britain's relationship with the EU will be involved a bit later.

I'm really liking this TL. What was the state of Iraqi forces in the region at this point in time? Will they play a combat active role supporting the UK in operations against Iran?

I'm assuming that Iraqi troops are playing a very limited role (One of the updates mentions that they were helping with the border patrols for example).
 
Keep me posted! Very interesting so far. I intend to follow this to the end and we shall see of a possible role in the end for the former Iranian royals and see if they may make sort of a comeback in Iran.
 
13 - Incidents and Accidents

Oh to be, oh to be a liar...

Since the start of hostilities both sides had been fairly careful to avoid hitting
civilians and third parties, especially since Iran knew that if they attacked neutral oil facilities things would likely go very bad very quickly. On the 22nd of April though things broke down in that regard for the first time. A Saudi registered oil tanker was hit by two Iranian anti-ship missiles and sank in the Persian Gulf, with only a handful of survivors. Privately Iran always admitted it was an accident and they had thought it was a British warship, but publically they denied all knowledge of the incident, claiming that it was a British false flag operation designed to bring the US into the war. This incident led to a
spike in oil prices, already high due to the war. It hit $125 per barrel for a few hours, before stabalising at around $110.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECRET IRAN ONLY
WHILE WE ARE PREPARED TO ACCEPT THE VERSION OF EVENTS YOU PROVIDE, WE WOULD URGE YOU TO BE MORE OPEN IN PUBLIC IN ORDER TO AVOID DESTABALISING THE OIL MARKET FURTHER.
- Diplomatic cable sent from the US to Iran 25/4/06, after Iran claimed the incident was an accident but didn't publically acknowledge it.

SECRET UK GOVT.
IRAN HAS ADMITTED TO US THAT THE SINKING OF THE TANKER WAS AN ACCIDENT, AND FOR NOW WE HAVE NO REASON TO DISBELIEVE THEIR VERSION OF EVENTS. HOWEVER WE WILL MONITOR THE SITUATION TO
ENSURE THEY ARE NOT INTENTIONALLY TARGETING OIL PRODUCTION FACILITIES.
-The US Explanation to Britain about the incident, sent 26/4/06

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That wasn't the only accident that Iran's military had to deal with. A couple of days later an Iranian medium range missile, presumably aimed at Iraq, landed in Turkey[1], prompting the Turkish government to complain to the UN. Iran did acknowledge this as an accident though and promised to pay Turkey for any damage (as it happens there was minimal property damage).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Not quite as bad as the US hitting Sofia during the '99 Kosovo campaign, but basically analogous.
 
A bit later than expected, but an update:

14 - Transfer of power

So ya / thought ya / might like to go to the show / to feel the warm thrill of confusion...

One of advantages of the British political system is how smooth tranfers of power are. Generally one Prime Minister can resign and the next one be invited to form a government within a matter of minutes. Of course, in the case of Tony Blair there was always going to be a bit of a lengthier transfer since he had announced in advance when he would go.

By the start of May it was clear, even to the hard left of the Labour party, that Harriet Harman was going to easily beat John McDonnell for the leadership and, by extentsion, become the UK's second female Prime Minister, and first female party leader not named Margaret[1].

Harman had always known she was favourite to win the leadership, and she also made clear that while she wanted to be seen as a clean break from Blair, she would also show Iran that a woman could lead a first world military effectively[2].

Events in early May though conspired to make the end of Blair's government, and the start of Harman's, rather more eventful than people would have liked. Firstly, on the 4th of May a man was arrested under the Terrorism Act for taking pictures of Football stadiums in Manchester, he was initially accused of being an Iranian agent, although this was dropped relatively quickly. He remained in custody however.

Not helping the issue was the problems of so called "ethnic tensions" in cities like Birmingham, where a riot broke out following an incident outside a mosque. Exactly what happened remains unclear, and in fact it's entirely possible nothing happened, but word got around that something had, and that was enough to spark 24 hours of madness[3], which led to an increased police presence around possible trouble spots.

Adding to the slight government paranoia was the fact that a couple of days later the American intelligence agencies re-iterated their concerns about Iranian agents in Britain. While it was generally thought that any major infiltration was unlikely it led the government to consider emergency censorship measures, although it was decided that this was unecessary.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That week was quite mad really. Firstly I was told that there was basically no way I was going to lose the leadership election, which was a pleasent surprise. I guess that John was seen as too left wing even for the Unions. It's quite a funny feeling to realise that you're going to be Prime Minister. I wasn't worried as such, but I was certainly motivated.

Then a few days after that I was accused of being too hawkish in my speech to a women's group, although I stand by what I said. At the time I think some people were worried about whether a woman could be an effective leader during a war. I was tempted when writing the speech[4] to reference Thatcher, but decided that doing that might not go down well for an incoming Labour leader...


- Harriet Harman, My rise and fall, an autobiography, published 2013.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As the countdown to the change in Prime Minister was nearly reaching it's end, the war intensified briefly. On the morning of the 11th of May an Iranian missile hit a British base in Iraq, killing ten soldiers and wounding more than 20 more. It was decided as a result of this that Airstrikes would be launched deeper into Iran, in an attempt to take out missile launch sites. Prior to this most of the action had been confined to the coast and the border between Iran and Iraq, in order to prevent an invasion of Iraq and protect shipping. Concerns were raised about the fact that missions deeper in Iran might result in more British prisoners of war[5], but it was decided that the risk was worth it if it reduced British casualties of missile strikes.

In the end the 12th of May itself went without any problems, although it was hardly the best time for someone to become Prime Minister. Harman's Cabinet, which contained one or two surprises, and one or two familiar faces, was announced later that day. The main cabinet apointments were as follows:

Prime Minister, First Lord[6] of the Treasury, Minister for the Civil Service - Harriet Harman

Deputy Prime Minister - John Prescott

Chancellor of the exchequer, Second Lord of the Treasury - Gordon Brown

Lord Chancellor, Secretary for constitutional affairs, Leader of the House Of Lords - Lord Falconer

Leader of the House of Commons, First secretary of state, Lord President of the council - Yvette Cooper

Foreign Secretary - Jack Straw

Home Secretary - Margaret Beckett

Defence Secretary - David Blunkett

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Thatcher, obviously, but Margaret Beckett was, officially, Labour leader for a while after John Smith died. Of course in OTL Harman got the same distinction, just a bit later.

[2]Again, Thatcher did this in '82, but of course she was a Tory, so Harman wont be publically praising her anytime soon.

[3]This is based on an incident in Birmingham in OTL where a girl was alleged sexually assaulted in a shop leading to a few days of rioting. It turned out that the girl probably never even existed.

[4]Do any politicians write their own speeches? Do they ever tell the truth in
autobiographies?

[5]The two that were captured earlier haven't been forgotten, they'll play a role later.

[6]Without checking, I'm fairly sure that title is masculine regardless of who holds it.
 
Great Read. But one major problem I seen. In 06-07 Bush was looking for a reason to hit Iran.:mad: Price of oil be damn.:mad:

If the Uk gets into this mess, I don't see how you kep the US out.
 
Great Read. But one major problem I seen. In 06-07 Bush was looking for a reason to hit Iran.:mad: Price of oil be damn.:mad:

If the Uk gets into this mess, I don't see how you kep the US out.

I mentioned before, but I think it was mainly Cheney who wanted to go after Iran. As I also mentioned, the US are kind of backstabbing Iran slightly, by helping the British with intel and logistics, but saying that they're neutral.
 
Just a short interlude here. You'll notice that I'm not revealing who's diary it is yet. There are a variety of reasons for that.

15 - Interlude: Diary part 1

Each fleeting thought behind my eye / Just up and leaves me / Into the wild like a bastard child / Born under a briar

12/5/06 - Today was quite interesting. First of all everyone was running around like idiots this morning, and then once Harriet had gone to palace you had everyone waiting around their phones to see who was going to be in the cabinet. It was quite funny really watching people jump out of their skin whenever a phone rang. The madness took away some of the tension that the war has been causing recently. I was quite surprised to get a call myself, and I'm now a minister in the MoD. The ministerial salary will certainly come in handy. One thing that worries me though is how much information I'll be dealing with. I think I'll always be paranoid about revealing something I shouldn't. The paranoia might help though, since I think about it more.
 
Last edited:
16 - ...It's our turn now for some shock and awe

I dreamt last night of a sorrowless field / and woke to a lamentation

While, in the grand scheme of things, the British worries about Iranian sympathisers and / or sleeper cells in the country were overstated, there were a number of times when it was shown that the fears were warrented. The first, and arguably worst, of these happened on the morning of May the 16th. It was realised by the group involved that even after 7/7 the security of the railway network as a whole left a lot to be desired[1], and most stations had limited if any way of checking luggage. Even at stations on the East Coast Mainline the lack of security was clear to anyone who paid attention[2].

It's beleived that Newark Northgate[3] station was chosen by the plotters as a boarding point because it is fairly central, and is in an area that is not well policed. Four men, of "Non-descript middle eastern appearance", to use the words of the official report, boarded the 07:33 to Kings Cross. They all had individual tickets to Stevenage and large bags, which may have been noticed if they had been visibly a group. As it happened, all the tickets were (intentionally) for seats in separate carriages.

The official report identified that the only major chance for the plan to fail was that it wasn't a suicide attack, and relied on the men leaving the train at Stevenage as per their tickets. If someone had noticed that the men's bags were unattended after this point it might have been possible to avert the attack, although it's generally assumed that the bombs were booby trapped anyway. In the event, no-one noticed anything amiss (or if they did, they failed to report it).

The train arrived at Kings Cross at 08:50, and the first bomb exploded shortly afterwards. This was followed by three more explosions, at about 3 minute intervals. In total 248 people were killed in the inital blasts, with a further 5 dying later in hospital. Estimates for the number of injured vary somewhat, but the offical figure is given as 432. Much like on 7/7 the attack caused major chaos in and around London and, once it was realised how the attack had been carried out, on the rail network as a whole. The fear of more bombs led to a number of innocent people being arrested after accidentally leaving luggage unattended.

The movements of the bombers, following their leaving the train at Stevenage, are not clear, although it's believed (and assumed by the official report) that they were picked up by private cars and taken to one or more safe houses.


The public reaction was one of shock first and foremost. The attack reminded people that there was a war going on, and in some ways increased support for the government. People mostly though resolved to keep going as if nothing had happened, and to that end the majority of rail services were running the following day, albeit with tighter security in a few places[4]. As always however there were people who were of the opinion that Britain had almost brought the attack on itself by it's handling of Iran prior to the war. One thing the attacks didn't do was stop the protest marches that were scheduled for that weekend. It was thought by the Home Office that cancelling the protests would anger those involved unduly and add to an already confused policing mess.

This noble aim was then undermined by the decision of the Metropolitan Police, taken a day or so after the bombings, to re-instate the alleged "shoot to kill" policy for suspected suicide bombers. This policy had already caused the police a severe amount of trouble[5] and there was desent from many groups, including Liberty who said that this would only add numbers to their protest.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was in my office when someone came in and told me what had happened. My first thought actually was that it wasn't related to Iran, and it was just a suicide bomber taking advantage of the war to prove a point. Within the hour though, after a hastily arranged meeting of COBRA which involved flying in a couple of people by helicopter[6], it was clear that whoever was behind the attack had a very good idea what they were doing.

For most of that day we worked on the assumption that it was a suicide attack, so it was quite a surprise when the Met told us that they were looking for 4 men. There was some discussions had over whether we should release the images we had of them immediately, and we decided to wait until the following day, to give the police the chance to find them and deal with them in relative secrecy.


- Harriet Harman, My rise and fall, an autobiography, published 2013.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exactly what Harman means by "find... and deal with them in relative secrecy" has become the subject of much debate . No documents related to this period are available at all, if any even exist. The most common explanation is the obvious one, that she wanted the men killed in secret, although there is no direct evidence that's what she meant. What is clear is that the police did indeed publish the CCTV images the following morning, although given the descriptions of the men this didn't produce any concrete leads.

Iran has never formally admitted that it was directly behind the attack, although they have never officially denied it either. The closest it got was a blanket apology for "all British dead" a year or so after the war ended.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Apparently the manner of this attack is a "known issue" according to an internet acquaintance who works as a security consultant.

[2]Including me, hence where the idea came from.

[3]Whether the correct spelling is North Gate or Northgate is both irrelevant and a stupid argument.

[4]Which always strikes me as shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted for the most part, but anyway.

[5]This happened in OTL, because it's before the POD. Look up Jean Charles de Menezes if you don't know the story.

[6]The papers would probably critisize her somewhat for doing this, even in the circumstances, but that's the British papers for you.
 
Last edited:
We have the Lion back again

What is the Iranian reistance up to?
Palahavi has an army in Turkey after all, I'm sure his people will gladly
ally with the UK to Kickith the Crapola, out of the mullahs
 
What is the Iranian reistance up to?
Palahavi has an army in Turkey after all, I'm sure his people will gladly
ally with the UK to Kickith the Crapola, out of the mullahs

My thinking is that they are being helped out by the British (Iran like accusing Britain of doing this in OTL). I might make some mention of them later.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top