This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/12/british-agents-odd-case-cia-torture-lord-west

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
British agents may have known of ‘odd case’ of CIA torture, says Lord West British agents may have known of ‘odd case’ of CIA torture, says Lord West
(35 minutes later)
British agents may have been aware of the “odd case” of torture by CIA officers and may even have been present while waterboarding was happening but a full public inquiry would be a waste of time, Lord West, a former Home Office minister and ex-chief of defence intelligence, has said.British agents may have been aware of the “odd case” of torture by CIA officers and may even have been present while waterboarding was happening but a full public inquiry would be a waste of time, Lord West, a former Home Office minister and ex-chief of defence intelligence, has said.
The senior Labour politician said there was no need for a new inquiry despite growing political pressure for a full investigation into British complicity in torture in the wake of a damning report about CIA torture of detainees in the wake of 9/11.The senior Labour politician said there was no need for a new inquiry despite growing political pressure for a full investigation into British complicity in torture in the wake of a damning report about CIA torture of detainees in the wake of 9/11.
Fresh calls for an inquiry have been made after it emerged that UK intelligence agencies asked the US to delete references to British spies from the Senate committee report and that UK government representatives had 24 meetings with members of the inquiry.Fresh calls for an inquiry have been made after it emerged that UK intelligence agencies asked the US to delete references to British spies from the Senate committee report and that UK government representatives had 24 meetings with members of the inquiry.
Theresa May, the home secretary, and West, are the two ministers named as having met the committee but the former head of the Royal Navy denied ever having lobbied the committee to secure redactions.Theresa May, the home secretary, and West, are the two ministers named as having met the committee but the former head of the Royal Navy denied ever having lobbied the committee to secure redactions.
“That is now made very, very clear. It started to be made clear by the last government that they must not be involved at all or even around when this is going on,” West told the BBC.“That is now made very, very clear. It started to be made clear by the last government that they must not be involved at all or even around when this is going on,” West told the BBC.
“Looking back historically, if you are an agent embedded in some foreign country and this was going on, it was quite difficult for them to extricate themselves even though they weren’t implementing that torture.“Looking back historically, if you are an agent embedded in some foreign country and this was going on, it was quite difficult for them to extricate themselves even though they weren’t implementing that torture.
“So I’m sure there may be the odd case where an agent was aware what the Americans were doing, but that has now been sealed off because they are very clear now what the position is.”“So I’m sure there may be the odd case where an agent was aware what the Americans were doing, but that has now been sealed off because they are very clear now what the position is.”
West also dismissed calls for a public inquiry, which have been made by Andrew Tyrie, a senior Tory backbencher, Conservative MP David Davis, a former shadow home secretary, Sarah Teather, a Lib Dem former children’s minister, and Diane Abbott, the Labour former shadow minister. Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, has also hinted he would back a full public inquiry if an investigation by parliament’s intelligence and security committee (ISC) does not get to the bottom of the matter.West also dismissed calls for a public inquiry, which have been made by Andrew Tyrie, a senior Tory backbencher, Conservative MP David Davis, a former shadow home secretary, Sarah Teather, a Lib Dem former children’s minister, and Diane Abbott, the Labour former shadow minister. Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, has also hinted he would back a full public inquiry if an investigation by parliament’s intelligence and security committee (ISC) does not get to the bottom of the matter.
But West told Sky News: “I really do think it’s a waste of time. What are we trying to prove? The only thing one might find is 10, 15 years ago maybe an agent or maybe two agents were aware waterboarding was going on, indeed may even have been in the same building.But West told Sky News: “I really do think it’s a waste of time. What are we trying to prove? The only thing one might find is 10, 15 years ago maybe an agent or maybe two agents were aware waterboarding was going on, indeed may even have been in the same building.
“But in the last 10 years or so we have made it very clear exactly what the position is for all our agents, they know they are not allowed even to be there when anything like that happens.”“But in the last 10 years or so we have made it very clear exactly what the position is for all our agents, they know they are not allowed even to be there when anything like that happens.”
The government has not ruled out a full public inquiry into what British ministers and agents knew about CIA torture in the wake of 9/11 but said this would not happen until after the ISC has reported in the next parliament.The government has not ruled out a full public inquiry into what British ministers and agents knew about CIA torture in the wake of 9/11 but said this would not happen until after the ISC has reported in the next parliament.
Labour has held off calling for a public inquiry into what happened during its last time in office, but on Friday, Douglas Alexander, the shadow foreign secretary, said: “Any suggestion that the UK government has new evidence to suggest that British agencies were engaged in such activities must be fully examined and resolved.”Labour has held off calling for a public inquiry into what happened during its last time in office, but on Friday, Douglas Alexander, the shadow foreign secretary, said: “Any suggestion that the UK government has new evidence to suggest that British agencies were engaged in such activities must be fully examined and resolved.”
Calls for a public inquiry have intensified since Downing Street admitted that British spies were granted redactions on “national security grounds” and new documents showed a series of meetings between the Senate committee and UK government representatives.Calls for a public inquiry have intensified since Downing Street admitted that British spies were granted redactions on “national security grounds” and new documents showed a series of meetings between the Senate committee and UK government representatives.
In a letter to the charity Reprieve in July, the then foreign secretary, William Hague, said: “The UK government has not sought to influence the content of the Senate report. We have made representations to seek assurance that ordinary procedures for clearance of UK material will be followed in the event that UK material provided to the Senate committee were to be disclosed.”In a letter to the charity Reprieve in July, the then foreign secretary, William Hague, said: “The UK government has not sought to influence the content of the Senate report. We have made representations to seek assurance that ordinary procedures for clearance of UK material will be followed in the event that UK material provided to the Senate committee were to be disclosed.”
May has not yet commented on the subject of her meeting with the US Senate committee but she will be questioned about the issue during a grilling by the Commons home affairs committee on Monday. Keith Vaz, the committee chairman, said the home secretary would be asked about the CIA’s detention and interrogation programme as well as other matters.
Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the former foreign secretary leading the ISC scrutiny of UK involvement in torture, acknowledged the redactions could create suspicions but insisted there was no cover-up.Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the former foreign secretary leading the ISC scrutiny of UK involvement in torture, acknowledged the redactions could create suspicions but insisted there was no cover-up.
He told the BBC: “I actually had a conversation two days ago with the head of the relevant intelligence agency, and he stated quite categorically what we have now heard publicly: that there were no requests to redact or to conceal anything in the report that referred to any allegations of United Kingdom complicity in the treatment of detainees; that the only redactions that were being requested were with regard to operational matters, which were genuine national security issues. Now, that’s what he has said to us. Of course, as part of our inquiry we will look into that further to be absolutely satisfied.”He told the BBC: “I actually had a conversation two days ago with the head of the relevant intelligence agency, and he stated quite categorically what we have now heard publicly: that there were no requests to redact or to conceal anything in the report that referred to any allegations of United Kingdom complicity in the treatment of detainees; that the only redactions that were being requested were with regard to operational matters, which were genuine national security issues. Now, that’s what he has said to us. Of course, as part of our inquiry we will look into that further to be absolutely satisfied.”
The two main cases relevant to the involvement of Britain’s intelligence agencies relate to Binyam Mohamed, a British citizen tortured and secretly flown to Guantánamo Bay, and the abduction of Abdel Hakim Belhaj and Sami-al-Saadi, two prominent Libyan dissidents, and their families, who were flown to Tripoli in 2004 where they were tortured by Muammar Gaddafi’s secret police.The two main cases relevant to the involvement of Britain’s intelligence agencies relate to Binyam Mohamed, a British citizen tortured and secretly flown to Guantánamo Bay, and the abduction of Abdel Hakim Belhaj and Sami-al-Saadi, two prominent Libyan dissidents, and their families, who were flown to Tripoli in 2004 where they were tortured by Muammar Gaddafi’s secret police.
There is no reference at all in the Senate’s 500-page report to UK intelligence agencies or the British territory of Diego Garcia, which is used by the US as a military base. But the executive summary contained heavy redactions throughout, prompting speculation that references to US allies had been erased.There is no reference at all in the Senate’s 500-page report to UK intelligence agencies or the British territory of Diego Garcia, which is used by the US as a military base. But the executive summary contained heavy redactions throughout, prompting speculation that references to US allies had been erased.
The government had initially commissioned an inquiry by retired judge Sir Peter Gibson to look at the UK’s treatment of detainees after 9/11. However, he only managed a preliminary report raising 27 serious questions about the behaviour of the UK security services, before it was replaced by an investigation handled by the ISC in December last year.The government had initially commissioned an inquiry by retired judge Sir Peter Gibson to look at the UK’s treatment of detainees after 9/11. However, he only managed a preliminary report raising 27 serious questions about the behaviour of the UK security services, before it was replaced by an investigation handled by the ISC in December last year.
The ISC’s report will not be completed before next year’s election, so it is unclear how many members of the nine-strong panel of MPs and peers will still be in parliament to complete the work.The ISC’s report will not be completed before next year’s election, so it is unclear how many members of the nine-strong panel of MPs and peers will still be in parliament to complete the work.