United States: Intelligence Sharing

Question

Asked by

To ask His Majesty’s Government why they have reportedly suspended some intelligence sharing with the United States of America.

There are long-standing intelligence and law enforcement frameworks between the UK and its Five Eyes partners: the US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Those frameworks continue. It is the long-standing policy of successive Governments to not comment on the detail of intelligence matters, but for the benefit of the House, I can say that the Foreign Secretary and the US Secretary of State have both dismissed recent reports.

I am grateful to my noble friend the Minister for that response. There is one issue in particular which is of major concern to people: the American bombing campaign on small boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific. I am told that 76 people have died in these attacks on civilian ships. There have been 19 attacks, most of which people believe are criminal activities on the high seas. There are often quite a lot of UK personnel on American ships, and they could be implicated in criminal charges. Has my noble friend considered removing UK military personnel from these ships until things calm down?

With regard to the strikes that have recently taken place, the United Kingdom was not involved. We are committed to fighting the scourge of drugs and organised crime with our partners in Latin America in accordance with legal obligations. I repeat that the UK was not involved.

My Lords, intelligence sharing is obviously essential to our national security, but if an ally leaks or withholds information or uses it for illegal actions, does that not require the UK to look more widely for autonomous intelligence gathering of our own, less dependence on others and more co-operation with other trusted partners?

It is important that the UK independently gathers intelligence. The Five Eyes partners of the UK—Australia, Canada and New Zealand—are critical intelligence-gathering partners. The UK is better and more secure because of that arrangement.

My Lords, I welcome the reassurance on the Five Eyes partnership, and I commend the Minister on his versatility and adaptability in taking on such a wide brief. We all know the feeling well. My specific question is about the meeting in Canada between the Foreign Secretary and the US Secretary of State. In light of the national security strategy that the United States issued only last week, what assessment have His Majesty’s Government made of the relationship, particularly as we go forward, with more than 100 conflicts raging around the world?

I am grateful for the support of the noble Lord for my taking on a number of issues today. The US strategy, which I saw earlier this week, is a matter for the US Government, but, self-evidently, the United Kingdom wants to participate and support where there are common objectives. As the noble Lord will have seen, this week the Prime Minister met the German Chancellor, the Ukrainian President and others to look at the challenges we face in Europe. I believe very strongly that a strong European partnership, where we increase defence expenditure in Europe and, at the same time, work with our American partners on key issues, is the right way forward. It is for the Americans to determine their priorities. It is for us to determine ours.

My Lords, my noble friend the Minister was on the Intelligence and Security Committee when it looked at detainee mistreatment and rendition in 2018. That report led to the Government of the day reviewing the consolidated guidance, which led to the Fulforth principles, which are very clear that we do not share intelligence if it leads to extrajudicial killing. Can he confirm that those principles are still active today and are understood not only by our security services but our allies? I assure the House, having been in Washington this week, that the intelligence sharing and co-operation are as strong as ever.

I am grateful to my noble friend for reminding me of my time on the Intelligence and Security Committee, and I am grateful to him for his work chairing it now. He has articulated the principles of information sharing. He will understand that I cannot comment on the details of intelligence sharing, but the UK will commit to and retain its legal responsibilities in that field.

My Lords, when the Government took the political decision to ban some arms to Israel and to then recognise the Palestinian state in a series of anti-Israel measures, the Israeli Government said at that point that they might consider reducing or stopping intelligence sharing with the UK Government. Have the Government made an assessment of the likely damage that that would do to the UK?

We have common interests with the Israeli Government, and we should try to maintain that data-sharing arrangement. What they do and how they operate is a matter for them. It is important that we have as wide data sharing as possible and information sharing with important strategic partners. The Five Eyes partnership is the cornerstone of that, but self-evidently, where there are common interests, other parties would wish to share information on a basis. I would hope that the Government’s decision to recognise a Palestinian state does not impact upon the ability to look at wider threats, should they exist.

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the clarifications he has made during this Question. Can he confirm that the United Kingdom has sufficient assets in the Caribbean so as to continually fight against the scourge of the drug trade in that area?

I can assure the noble Earl, and for once, this question does fall within my direct responsibilities. There are a number of areas where the UK Government, particularly with the overseas territories, are working in partnership, looking at how we can support the reduction of drugs, the reduction of gang activity and the prevention of illegal migration between overseas territories in the wider Caribbean area. We have a very strong partnership with the United States on dealing with those issues. Where there are particular stress points, we are, even now, looking at how we can support those overseas territories, particularly, which are under British responsibility as well, to ensure that we take that fight to the drugs barons on equal terms.