posted on February 26, 2004 11:10:51 AM new
LONDON - British intelligence agents spied on U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in the run-up to the Iraq (news - web sites) war, a former member of Prime Minister Tony Blair 's Cabinet said Thursday.
Blair refused to say whether the allegation was true but said the minister, International Development Secretary Clair Short, had been "deeply irresponsible."
A U.N. spokesman said any such espionage would be illegal.
For Blair, Short's accusation was yet another potentially damaging aftershock from his alliance with President Bush to topple Saddam Hussein. British intelligence dossiers claiming Iraq had an active and growing program of weapons of mass destruction have not been validated by evidence on the ground.
It also was only the latest allegation of spying on U.N. missions ahead of the United States' invasion of Iraq.
Earlier this month, Mexico's former ambassador to the United Nations said it was common knowledge that the United States spied on U.N. delegations in the lead-up to war. Chile also alleged its U.N. mission telephones were tapped as the Security Council considered a resolution backed by Washington, Britain and Spain authorizing the war.
On Wednesday, prosecutors in London abandoned a case against an intelligence employee who leaked a memo disclosing U.S. and British intentions to eavesdrop on several U.N. missions in advance of a key Security Council vote.
Blair's government also became involved in a furious controversy over the death of a weapons scientist who reportedly raised questions about the integrity of the intelligence dossiers.
At U.N. headquarters in New York, the world body gave its first reaction Thursday to allegations that Annan was spied on.
"We would be disappointed if this were true," U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said in New York. "Such activities would undermine the integrity and confidential nature of diplomatic exchanges. Those who speak to the secretary-general are entitled to assume that their exchanges are confidential."
Short, who resigned her post after the campaign to topple Saddam, said she had read transcripts of Annan's conversations while she was a Cabinet member.
"The U.K. in this time was also getting, spying on Kofi Annan's office and getting reports from him about what was going on," she said in an interview with British Broadcasting Corp. radio.
The charge dominated Blair's monthly news conference,
"I'm not going to comment on the operations of our security services," Blair said.
"But I do say this: we act in accordance with domestic and international law, and we act in the best interests of this country, and our security services are a vital part of the protection of this country.
"So I'm not going to comment on their operations, not directly, not indirectly. That should not be taken, as I say, as an indication about the truth of any particular allegations. And I think the fact that those allegations were made, I think, is deeply irresponsible," Blair said.
In her interview, Short spoke of seeing evidence of eavesdropping. "These things are done. And in the case of Kofi's office, it's been done for some time," she said.
Asked whether Britain was involved, she said: "Well, I know I have seen transcripts of Kofi Annan's conversations. In fact, I have had conversations with Kofi in the run-up to war thinking 'Oh dear, there will be a transcript of this and people will see what he and I are saying.'"
Asked explicitly whether British spies had been instructed to carry out operations within the United Nations on people such as Annan, she said: "Yes, absolutely."
Short had publicly questioned whether Britain should go to war in Iraq but eventually backed it in the House of Commons. She resigned in May, complaining the United Nations did not have a large enough role in reconstruction.
Since then, she has called for Blair to resign, accusing him of misleading the country about the threat posed by Saddam.
Short's comments came as she was interviewed about Wednesday's decision to drop legal proceedings against a former intelligence employee who leaked a confidential memo raising concerns about spying in the United Nations.
Katharine Gun, 29, a former Mandarin translator with Britain's Government Communications Headquarters listening station, leaked a memo from U.S. intelligence officers asking their British counterparts to spy on members of the U.N. Security Council.
At the time, the United States was seeking to win Security Council backing for war.
The Observer newspaper quoted the memo, dated Jan. 31, 2003, as asking British and American intelligence staff to step up surveillance operations "particularly directed at ... U.N. Security Council Members (minus U.S. and GBR, of course)."
Opposition politicians have questioned whether the decision to abandon the case was politically aimed to avoid embarrassing disclosures.
Reacting to the Gun case and Short's allegations, Blair told reporters: "We are going to be in a very dangerous situation as a country if people feel they can simply spill out secrets or details of security operations — whether false or true actually — and get away with it."
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on February 26, 2004 11:24:35 AM newMexico's former ambassador to the United Nations said it was common knowledge that the United States spied on U.N. delegations in the lead-up to war.
I was going to say I remember this being discussed at that same time. That I'm aware of no legal charges have been made and it's been what 8-9 months.
I agree with the statements in the last paragraph of your post.
posted on February 26, 2004 11:33:48 AM new
You have no problem with the UK and US spying on the UN and bugging delgates phones as long as it's not leaked? I'm curious what your response would be if it was discovered that Syria and Jordan had done the conspiring and that the US delegation phones were targeted. Would you still only have a problem with the fact that it was leaked?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on February 26, 2004 01:06:49 PM new
No, I'm not saying anything about those things.
I'm saying I don't find it surprising that any nation is spying on another or another UN Rep. And as your article implies....neither do many in the UN. Imo, it's just more political digs at Blair from those who opposed his actions. And I agree with him on his National Security statement.
I remember when we found out we had Russian spies living in a San Francisco building....and all the fuss that sturred up. It's just a part of the 'game' that's played between Nations.
edited to clarify
Re-elect President Bush!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Feb 26, 2004 01:09 PM ]
posted on February 26, 2004 01:29:03 PM new
Just out of curiosity - Does the US ever do wrong in your eyes? I mean this pone isn't even a matter of national security (unless you think that the UN was trying to gather the troop to launch a war against us) and it's still OK that we we requested another country break laws on our behalf. If Clinton had done it would it have been wrong?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on February 26, 2004 01:50:07 PM new
fenix - What you aren't getting isn't that it's 'my country right or wrong', nor which President I support or don't.
It's that this is an OLD accusation that has re surfaced and there still is no PROOF. Just the word of someone who didn't like what Blair did. So....do I take the unproven word of someone who opposed this war against my own country? No. If clinton were president I'd feel no differently.
posted on February 26, 2004 01:53:37 PM new
Did you actually read the article Linda?
[i] Katharine Gun, 29, a former Mandarin translator with Britain's Government Communications Headquarters listening station, leaked a memo from U.S. intelligence officers asking their British counterparts to spy on members of the U.N. Security Council.
At the time, the United States was seeking to win Security Council backing for war.
The Observer newspaper quoted the memo, dated Jan. 31, 2003, as asking British and American intelligence staff to step up surveillance operations "particularly directed at ... U.N. Security Council Members (minus U.S. and GBR, of course)." [/i]
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on February 26, 2004 02:06:50 PM new
Yes, fenix - And this is where I focused...
Blair refused to say whether the allegation was true.
So...have you read that it has been confirmed?
I'm saying his opposing party did a smear job on Blair in regards to the weapons scientist too. And your article rehashes that issue too, even though Blair was found to have had nothing to do with his death. But your article didn't mention that either.
posted on February 26, 2004 02:46:09 PM new
You have a hard copy memo and you do not believe it becuase a politician whose career hangs in the balance won't confirm it that he knew of it? In reality Blair refusing to comment has NOTHING to do with the US requesting the bugging of the UN.
I do find it funny that you place you trust in Blair who can't even deny his guilt but insist that other leaders consistantly lie despite their denials.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by Fenix03 on Feb 26, 2004 03:12 PM ]
posted on February 26, 2004 03:05:00 PM newTrust in Blair.....an assumption on your part. There are only a couple politicians that I trust on every word they say. I just don't assume because an alligation has been made....that it's true.
If this is true, fenix. There will be an investigation just like there was when the scientist killed himself. Blair was blamed for causing his death...turns out it wasn't true. That's what you see...me giving him the benefit of the doubt....until....
posted on February 26, 2004 03:12:37 PM new
No comment on the Memo?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on February 26, 2004 03:33:32 PM new
[i]Blair refused to say whether the allegation was true......
It also was only the latest allegation of spying on U.N. missions...
Chile also alleged.....
"We would be disappointed if this were true," U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said in New York.
The memo: The Observer Newpaper quote....do you notice how it's not the full quote? Just one partial sentence?
fenix - I'm not saying if we or Blair did do something wrong, it shouldn't be brought to light. But I am saying there was more than one person, who opposed Blair on this war and who accused him about causing the scientists death. And I'm fully aware there are just as many people in the UK who want to see Blair out, as there are people here who are working to accomplish the same thing here at home with President Bush.
posted on February 26, 2004 03:44:37 PM newYou have no problem with the UK and US spying on the UN and bugging delgates phones as long as it's not leaked?
I have no problem with it at all. There's nothing wrong with spying on enemies. My only complaint is that they got caught.
