Blair government's rendition policy led to rift between UK spy agencies

[Ghost Dog]

British involvement in controversial and clandestine rendition operations provoked an unprecedented row between the UK’s domestic and foreign intelligence services, MI5 and MI6, at the height of the “war on terror”, the Guardian can reveal.

The head of MI5, Eliza Manningham-Buller, was so incensed when she discovered the role played by MI6 in abductions that led to suspected extremists being tortured, she threw out a number of her sister agency’s staff and banned them from working at MI5’s headquarters, Thames House.

According to Whitehall sources, she also wrote to the then prime minister, Tony Blair, to complain about the conduct of MI6 officers, saying their actions had threatened Britain’s intelligence gathering and may have compromised the security and safety of MI5 officers and their informants.

The letter caused a serious and prolonged breakdown of trust between Britain’s domestic and foreign spy agencies provoked by the Blair government’s support for rendition...

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/31/revealed-britain-rendition-policy-rift-between-spy-agencies-mi6-mi5

The revelations... show, first, at least some of what lay behind the euphemistic references to the “uncomfortable relationship” of MI6 with the government that led to Sir Richard Dearlove’s departure as head of that service in 2004. This, it would appear, was an understatement of the first order: at the height of the Iraq war, the heads of the UK’s two major intelligence agencies were at each other’s throats.

They show, second, that rendition – the clandestine transfer of terrorist suspects from one country to another where they were likely to be subject to methods of interrogation which are outside the law – met opposition at the very top of UK intelligence. At least someone retained her moral compass: a bouquet for Manningham-Buller. Alas, it is not at all clear that her view prevailed.

They show, third, not just the fawning attitude that infests UK intelligence relations with the United States – but also the protectionism exercised by individual services. In the particular case at issue here – the enforced return of exiled Libyan opposition leader Abdul Hakim Belhaj to Tripoli in 2004, where he was detained and as he says repeatedly tortured – MI6 was concerned to take all the “credit”, demonstrating its prowess to the US, but keeping Belhaj to itself.

And, fourth, the revelations show how successful the powers that be have been in keeping the covers on these reprehensible practices to this day. The CPS is still deciding whether there should be prosecutions and Belhaj himself is awaiting a ruling on his case from the supreme court. The Gibson inquiry on rendition was summarily halted, after details of Belhaj’s case emerged, and the questions it raised were left unanswered. Lawsuits brought by those who claim they were subject to rendition have been settled out of court. Individual intelligence agents are thus spared from appearing as witnesses; more important, the agencies themselves are let off the hook...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/01/mi5-mi6-myth-uk-intelligence-superiority

[Bad Dog]

1. Puts Blair's warnings about Corbyn into context.

The Tories would never set a precedent of putting an ex prime minister on trial.

[Ghost Dog]

2. Judge-led rendition inquiry long overdue

Whether or not there was a “row” between different arms of the UK’s intelligence services over MI6’s role in the rendition of Abdel Hakim Belhaj and his wife to Libya pales into insignificance compared to whether anyone is going to be made answerable for their actions in this deeply disturbing affair (Blair government’s rendition policy led to rift between UK spy agencies, 1 June). There seems little doubt that Mr Belhaj endured years of suffering in one of Colonel Gaddafi’s jails as a direct consequence of MI6’s involvement in his kidnapping by the CIA.

It’s now nearly six years since David Cameron promised a judge-led inquiry into this and other credible allegations that UK officials were involved in a wide pattern of kidnap, detention and torture overseas during the “war on terror”.

However, instead of a fully independent, judge-led inquiry, we’re now awaiting an investigation by the underpowered intelligence and security committee – entirely the wrong body for this vital task. The ISC is also required to send its findings to the prime minister of the day, who has the final say over what the public will – and will not – be allowed to see from the ISC’s investigation.

While spook specialists will be interested in whether the spies fell out over rendition, the real issue is the business of establishing the full truth and ensuring proper accountability over one of the murkiest episodes in Britain’s recent history.

Allan Hogarth
Head of policy and government affairs, Amnesty International UK

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/03/judge-led-rendition-inquiry-long-overdue