• Military
• WMD
• Intelligence

• Security Menu                     

• Systems
• Industry
• Operations
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Space

UK House of Commons - Foreign Affairs Select Committee

Foreign Policy Aspects of the War against Terrorism

2 July 2006

Supplementary evidence submitted by the Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs

  I agreed to provide a detailed response to three questions raised by the Committee during my appearance before it on 24 October 2005 as follows;

—  the security situation in Basra (Younger-Ross, q 78)

—  extraordinary rendition (Illsey, q 110)

—  controls of radiological material in the Former Soviet Union (Mackinlay, q 137 and 138)

  My responses to these questions are set out below.

SECURITY SITUATION IN BASRA

Q78  Richard Younger-Ross: Pursuing the point on Basra, I had the privilege to visit there just after the fighting finished and saw what an excellent task our Forces were doing. I have to say that they were clearly not fully prepared for the task in front of them, because the Government had clearly not thought about the fact that it needed extra DfID help and advisors in relation to police and other areas. However, the Forces did a magnificent job in dealing with the local tribal issues and working with the local community. There has clearly been a deterioration in the relationships between our Forces there and the local authorities. What is being done to build those bridges?

  During my visit to Basra, on 11 November, I was able to meet the Deputy Governor and to see first hand that relations with the local authorities have improved since the events of 19 September. The joint UK/Iraq statement of 11 October, expressing regret that the incident took place and for the casualties on both sides and damage to public facilities, forms part of the wider efforts to restore good working relations with the Iraqi authorities in Basra.

  Present at my meetings in order to continue support for the Iraqi political process in Basra—were senior members of Basra Provincial Council, and a cross-section of local civil society (including Shi'i and Sunni tribal leaders). All my interlocutors emphasised the need for greater consultation with the UK presence in Basra. During my visit, I called on the Basra Provincial Council to condemn those groups mounting attacks on MND(SE) and to ensure local security forces took effective action against them. This will help remove the major obstacle to an acceleration of reconstruction and the strengthening of co-operation.

  In Southern Iraq more widely the Department for International Development (DfID) has committed £131 million for infrastructure rehabilitation, of which £53 million has been spent on employment creation and improving local administration, along with a £40 million project for improved power and water supplies in southern Iraq. The power and water project will also help central government design an effective long-term infrastructure strategy. A Governance Development Fund provides project funding for work enabling Iraqi capacity building to take place. We also co-chair, with the United Nations, the Southern Iraq Donor Group, which aims to bring all the major civilian and military agencies together to better co-ordinate and deliver our response to reconstruction and development in Southern Iraq.

  Our staff—at the British Consulate General in Basra—have been hard at work ensuring greater Council involvement in reconstruction projects, security issues, and assistance for education and culture in Basra. We are, therefore, now currently on much better terms with the Governor and Council, and co-operation in all areas is proceeding as well as expected given the continuing fragile security situation. Our Consul General, James Tansley, now addresses weekly meetings of the Council and regularly discusses security issues with the Governor. We aim to continue this engagement to ensure that the legacy of our presence in Basra will create further renewal of the region.

EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION

Q110  Mr Illsley: Foreign Secretary, the letter which you supplied to the Committee in March which gave the conclusion that the British Government is not aware of the use of its territory or air space for the purpose of extraordinary rendition was taken at face value by most members of the Committee at that time, before the election. We took that to mean that we were not aware of any extraordinary rendition, and that it was not happening. The press reports were therefore something of a surprise. Would our Government be contacted by any country using our airspace, taking suspects to other countries? Would we be asked for permission or would there be any circumstances where we would be contacted; or is it the case that it could well be happening but that our Government is not aware of it simply because we have not been informed, or our permission is not necessary?

  Official permission (ie Diplomatic clearance) is not needed for non-scheduled, non-commercial civil aircraft, including VIP flights over-flying or landing at civilian airports in the UK. In such cases the flight operator simply files the aircraft flight plan to the central Integrated Flight Plans Systems (IFPS).

  In the case of military or State aircraft landing at military airfields, clearance is sought from the MoD. Certain countries have a block clearance on a yearly renewable basis in a quid pro quo agreement (US, Germany, Italy and many others). Otherwise all nations must formally request permission to land or transit. However, neither international nor national aviation regulations require the provision of passenger information when transiting UK territory or airspace.

CONTROLS OF RADIOLOGICAL MATERIAL IN THE FORMER SOVIET UNION

Q137  Andrew Mackinlay: I can, but this problem of timing has happened before—but I will move straight to my point. In the Former Soviet Union there are decaying lighthouses for example around the coast where there is material that can be taken by people . . . which could go into dirty bombs . . . There have also been reports that the market place for that is in the "Stans". Certainly there was quite a detailed and authoritative piece on the BBC PM Programme by Rob Broomby about this. It relates to what this Committee has drawn attention to in the past about the access to these materials throughout the Former Soviet Union—by way of example, lighthouses in remote places, which are looted—and also the fact that we are concerned about the "Stans" and we have not got representations for instance in Kyrgyzstan, where there is also the problem of Islamic refugees from Uzbekistan. In a sense, because we are under time constraints there are some related things here. One is the decay and access of stuff around the Former Soviet Union; second is the market place and the "Stans", and third is the absence of our representation in this very fragile country of Kyrgyzstan, which has this issue and the issue of the refugees from Uzbekistan.

  The Global Partnership against the spread of weapons and materials of mass destruction was inaugurated at the G8 Kananaskis Summit in 2002. Under the Global Partnership, G8 leaders pledged to provide up to $20 billion over ten years to projects, initially in Russia, to support non-proliferation, disarmament, counter-terrorism and nuclear safety. The UK has agreed to contribute up to $750 million over 10 years, with 80% of the current £36.5 million annual budget being spent on projects in the Russian Federation.

  Practical progress has been made in implementing commitments under the Global Partnership, including the physical protection of nuclear materials and facilities. The G8 Gleneagles Statement and the Sea Island G8 Action Plan on Non-Proliferation, highlighted the importance of addressing the security of nuclear materials, equipment and technology as well as radioactive sources. A number of countries have now established programmes with Russia and Ukraine to upgrade the physical protection of and account for nuclear materials. These include the US, UK, Germany, Canada, Norway, Sweden and the EU.

  One aspect of this work has been securing radiological sources such as those you mentioned. Several donors to the Global Partnership, including the US, Norway, Denmark, the Nordic Environmental Finance Corporation (NEFCO), Germany, Canada and France are supporting dismantling, storing and replacing some 700 highly radioactive Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs) which have been used to power Russian lighthouses. A Russian "RTG Master Plan" is being developed and efforts are under way to increase co-ordination among participating countries.

Rt Hon Jack Straw MP,

Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

22 November 2005