PRESIDENT George W Bush will ask Tony Blair this week for at least 15,000 British soldiers to lead a security force that will control Iraq after any US-led attack on Baghdad.

According to official sources in Washington, Bush wants Britain to head a multinational force that would secure large cities, patrol borders and Kurdish areas, guard oil fields and search for hidden caches of biological and chemical weapons.

Plans for a new regime in Iraq will be discussed on Friday when Blair arrives at the presidential retreat at Camp David for crucial talks with Bush about how much more time United Nations inspectors should be given to search for Iraqi weapons.

The two men spoke by telephone on Friday and agree that Saddam Hussein will have to be “disarmed by force” if he fails to give up his weapons of mass destruction, a Downing Street spokesman said.

British officials expect Bush to bow to European pressure and postpone a decision on war for at least two more weeks — even though Hans Blix, the chief inspector, will reveal in a report to the UN Security Council tomorrow that Saddam has failed to produce a single document on the whereabouts of a 3.9 ton stockpile of VX gas, one of the deadliest chemical weapons developed by Iraq.

As the UN prepared for another week of bruising debate over Saddam’s weapons programmes, Colin Powell, the US secretary of state, said a dozen nations were ready to follow Washington to war even if the security council failed to support it. “We would not be alone, that’s for sure,” he said.

Military tension increased yesterday with reports that Washington is preparing an unprecedented barrage of up to 800 cruise missiles in the first two days of any war. Fewer than 200 were fired in the first two days of the 1991 Gulf war.

The plan for mass opening strikes, known at the Pentagon as “shock and awe”, is intended as a psychological thunderclap to destroy Iraq’s will to fight. A US defence analyst also reported that the Pentagon was ready to use nuclear “bunker-busters” against underground targets if Saddam deploys chemical or biological weapons.

Washington has begun planning for an interim military administration to take over from Saddam. A US general is likely to assume command once Baghdad has fallen. But for diplomatic and military reasons, Washington wants British troops to run the post-combat security operation. “It’s the sort of thing the Brits are good at — early in, quick set-up, get things under control,” said one official.

A report to the US Congress calculated that a post-war security force would have to stay for at least a year and might cost up to £80,000 per soldier.

A senior Ministry of Defence source confirmed that British troops would play a leading role in maintaining order after Saddam’s removal. “The nature of the force is not just to fight the battle,” he said.

However, some Labour backbenchers will be incensed that Britain is being asked to accept the task. It could also add to public concern about Britain’s part in the crisis.

A YouGov poll for today’s Sunday Times shows that barely a quarter of voters (26%) believe the prime minister has convinced them of the need for military action. Only one in five thinks Britain should join the US in launching a strike without UN backing.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Donor organ allowed child’s own heart to heal
• Michael Jackson: Not the final chapter
• Brüno toned down for 15 rating