Con Coughlin: Is Britain no longer special to America?
[Con Coughlin is a British author and journalist.]
One minute, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, is waxing lyrical about the enduring strength of the special relationship between Britain and the United States. The next, he finds himself with his back to the wall in the House of Commons trying to defend Washington's latest bully-boy tactics.
Earlier this week, Miliband had enjoyed the enviable diplomatic distinction of becoming the first foreign envoy to meet with Hillary Clinton, the new US secretary of state. But within 24 hours of concluding his ground-breaking visit to Washington, Miliband was giving a rapidly-arranged statement to MPs defending Washington's allegedly high-handed treatment of requests from Britain's judiciary for details concerning the arrest and detention of former Guantanamo detainee Binyam Mohamed.
Two senior British judges, hearing a case brought by Mohamed to obtain details relating to his detention, were critical of Miliband. The Foreign Secretary had decided that intelligence reports relating to the case had to remain secret because the US was threatening to stop sharing intelligence on terror-related issues with Britain.
The pooling of intelligence resources between Britain and the US is one of the pillars of the special relationship between the countries, which dates back to America's entry to the First World War as a British ally when it became essential for Washington and London to share intelligence on enemy dispositions.
Today, the relationship has developed to such an extent that the relatively modest resources available to Britain's Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) mean it relies heavily on its better-funded and technologically-superior American counterparts. The successful defence of our realm is very much in American hands.
When it comes to thwarting the numerous Islamist-related terror attacks planned against the British Isles, invariably it is our transatlantic cousins who provide the tip-off that enables our security forces to apprehend the culprits before they have a chance to execute their plots.
But this relationship only works so long as the secrecy that underpins the intelligence shared between the two countries is kept top secret. "You have to work on the basis that the country that owns the original intelligence is not in any way compromised," explained a senior British security official. "Intelligence is passed between countries on the basis that its source remains confidential. It's all based on trust – and if that trust is compromised, everything starts to fall apart very quickly."
And that was precisely the dilemma the British government faced when it was required to deal with a British court's request for further details about Mohamed...
Read entire article at Telegraph (UK)
One minute, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, is waxing lyrical about the enduring strength of the special relationship between Britain and the United States. The next, he finds himself with his back to the wall in the House of Commons trying to defend Washington's latest bully-boy tactics.
Earlier this week, Miliband had enjoyed the enviable diplomatic distinction of becoming the first foreign envoy to meet with Hillary Clinton, the new US secretary of state. But within 24 hours of concluding his ground-breaking visit to Washington, Miliband was giving a rapidly-arranged statement to MPs defending Washington's allegedly high-handed treatment of requests from Britain's judiciary for details concerning the arrest and detention of former Guantanamo detainee Binyam Mohamed.
Two senior British judges, hearing a case brought by Mohamed to obtain details relating to his detention, were critical of Miliband. The Foreign Secretary had decided that intelligence reports relating to the case had to remain secret because the US was threatening to stop sharing intelligence on terror-related issues with Britain.
The pooling of intelligence resources between Britain and the US is one of the pillars of the special relationship between the countries, which dates back to America's entry to the First World War as a British ally when it became essential for Washington and London to share intelligence on enemy dispositions.
Today, the relationship has developed to such an extent that the relatively modest resources available to Britain's Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) mean it relies heavily on its better-funded and technologically-superior American counterparts. The successful defence of our realm is very much in American hands.
When it comes to thwarting the numerous Islamist-related terror attacks planned against the British Isles, invariably it is our transatlantic cousins who provide the tip-off that enables our security forces to apprehend the culprits before they have a chance to execute their plots.
But this relationship only works so long as the secrecy that underpins the intelligence shared between the two countries is kept top secret. "You have to work on the basis that the country that owns the original intelligence is not in any way compromised," explained a senior British security official. "Intelligence is passed between countries on the basis that its source remains confidential. It's all based on trust – and if that trust is compromised, everything starts to fall apart very quickly."
And that was precisely the dilemma the British government faced when it was required to deal with a British court's request for further details about Mohamed...