Iraq “dodgy dossier” authors strike again
Venezuela Farc files must be read with the same scepticism that WMD claims deserved.
By Francisco Dominguez Published 12 May 2011 18:08
A report launched this week risks repeating the mistake of the dodgy dossier that justified war on Iraq.
Launched by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) the dossier claims that it "looks in detail" at the Colombian guerrilla group Farc's "relations with Venezuela and Ecuador" by assessing files allegedly found on computers seized by the Colombian government from Farc in 2008. It has already received widespread coverage in the New York Times, the Times, the Guardian, Financial Times, CNN and BBC, to name a few.
Although the Interpol police organisation has explained that the handling of computer data by the Colombian authorities did "not conform to internationally recognised principles" and that its computer forensic examination of the files was not about verifying the "accuracy and source of the user files", this has not prevented all sorts of lurid allegations being made by the IISS.
New détente, new hostilities
If the name IISS rings alarm bells, it may be because you remember the role it played in events that led to publication of the dodgy dossier justifying war on Iraq. Worryingly for the continent, the same people and organisation now appear to have turned their attention to Latin America.
The report was launched against the backdrop of intensified efforts from the Republican right to target Venezuela. The Republicans' electoral victory in the US Senate and Congress elections last year placed some very right-wing figures in charge of influential foreign affairs bodies.
Connie Mack, Republican congressman for Florida, has said that, as the new chairman of the House subcommittee on the western hemisphere, he will seek to get Venezuela placed on the US state department's list of state sponsors of terrorism. His fellow Republican and foreign affairs committee chair, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, backed this agenda.
Many fear the timing of the report is also to torpedo the détente under way between Venezuela and Colombia. Until recently, US military bases were being prepared in Colombia that would surround Venezuela, but this agenda is now on the back burner. The IISS report may well form part of a strategy that achieves in provoking a new round of hostilities between the nations.
The IISS has a record of playing its own part in the rush to war in Iraq.
Whilst it claims to be "independent, owing no allegiance to any governments or any political or other organisations", the institute has ties to many neocons. Trustees and council members include Robert D Blackwill, a former deputy national security adviser to George W Bush; Dr John Hillen, formerly assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs under the Bush administration; Dr Eliot Cohen, Condoleezza Rice's former senior adviser on strategic issues; and Dr Ariel Levite, a former deputy national security adviser.
Figures from Britain who are involved include Sir David Manning, ambassador to the US and a foreign policy adviser to Tony Blair in the lead-up to the Iraq war, as well as Lord Powell of Bayswater, a former foreign policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher.
Dodge that dossier
The IISS role in the creation of the dodgy dossier on Iraq is clear. In September 2002 it launched "Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction: a Net Assessment", which made spurious claims about "the threat posed by Iraq's programmes to develop nuclear, biological and chemical weapons as well as ballistic missiles", including that "the retention of WMD capacities by Iraq is self-evidently the core objective of the regime".
Ominously, it warned: "Wait and the threat will grow; strike and the threat may be used. Clearly, governments have a pressing duty to develop early a strategy to deal comprehensively with this unique international problem."
The Daily Mail seized on this dossier as "the most compelling evidence yet that Iraq is . . . building up a lethal arsenal of weapons of mass destruction" and could be "months away" from building a nuclear bomb. Even the BBC ran the headline "UK hails new report".
As Kim Sengupta explained in the Independent:
The IISS dossier on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, published on 9 September 2002, was edited by Gary Samore, formerly of the US state department, and presented by Dr John Chipman, a former Nato fellow. It was immediately seized on by Bush and Blair administrations as providing "proof" that Saddam was just months away from launching a chemical and biological, or even a nuclear attack. Large parts of the IISS document were subsequently recycled in the now notorious Downing Street dossier, published with a foreword by the Prime Minister, the following week.
Worryingly, John Chipman is now the IISS's director general!
One common thread between the authors of the dodgy dossier on Iraq and its Latin American counterpart is Nigel Inkster, IISS director of transnational threats and political risk. He oversaw its "Farc files" report. Inkster was deputy director of MI6 in the lead-up to war with Iraq. He was "part of the team monitoring chemical and biological weapons proliferation, including Iraqi attempts to procure such material". It was under his deputy directorship that MI6 was instrumental in creating the now-infamous "dodgy dossier" on WMDs to sell the Iraq war to the British public.
Interestingly, Inkster also worked in Latin America during the dark period of the 1970s and 1980s.
Stacked with neocons and former UK and US members of the intelligence services, the IISS certainly can't be easily regarded as independent. Given that the IISS and Inkster have previously been involved in producing dangerously inaccurate dossiers, the so-called "Farc Files" should be treated with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Many in the media would do well to remember this and the consequences of their unquestioning coverage of the dodgy dossier on Iraq as they consider the IISS study into the "Farc Files". Instead they should encourage and celebrate how Colombia and Venezuela are peacefully and constructively dealing with very complex, long-term issues.
Francisco Domínguez is head of the Centre for Brazilian and Latin American Studies at Middlesex University.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















9 comments
I don't know anything about this report, but if it's not dodgy then it's probably at least biased.
Nobody should invade Venezuela but we should feel sympathy for the Venezuelan people who aren't exactly living the life of riley under Chavez.
"Life of rile." Is this the new standard for how to view other countries and the people's living conditions there?
You Danger, you agent of disinformation, you degenerate s.o.a.b, you know so well who is the oppressor and who is the victim. Your bloodthirst is not quenched even after killing millions of people in the last 70 years from Hiroshima to Afghanistan. A collaborated effort from all these agencies, the UN, the NATO, the CIA, the pro-war think tanks, the disinformation agents like yourself, this is what made these huge and countless killings possible... and still you have the face to say that USA is on the right side of the morality? What more can be said to a person like you? sh*t on you.
O I L ... O I L ... O I L.
This is not some ideologically conservative security position. It's mercenary Fascism, just like the Blackwater alumni now building a Special Ops army for the Arabs. They are recruiting and training Colombian mercenaries, with tacit US approval, HOLA? New York times article today...
but the West doesn't like the way it's going so it's building up it's case to say how evil Venezuela is, how undemocratic it is, how many human rights it is breaching - it's been going on for years. Honduras, Iraq, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Libya. whomever - the powers that be will make up, construe enough evidence enough to justify doing whatever is on their agenda.
Excellent article. Many people thought IISS is independent but it is really a pro war think tank.
"Venezuelan people who aren't exactly living the life of riley under Chavez"
Rubbish. They're living far, far better under Chavez than they were under the incompetent oligarchs who were in power before.
Oh dear Sam. The people of Venezuela have never had it good. Chavez has ,however given them education and health care for the first time in history. Chavez has put himself up for election on God knows how many occasions. He is probably the most democratically elected person on earth. The reason he gets elected is because the poorer people vote for him. The right wing and the USA want a return to the old way of 15 families running the country and coralling all the wealth. In other words the way it has been in Central and South America for decades. The USA has overthrown more democratic governments than any other nation on earth,starting with the Arbenz Government in 1954. They are responsible for murders and tortures committed by the monsters they have installed and supported. Recently ,they have been losing influence as countries in the region have been voting in leftish governments. What is happening here is an attempt to put the clock back and regain control. It must not be allowed to happen.
Is the is same Francisco Dominguez who appears at British Communist Party sponsored events celebrating 50 years of dictatorship in Cuba? Of course it is. Obviously a great choice for balanced insights into Latin American politics.
Dominguez follows the approved script - you can also read it on pro Chavez propaganda websites like venezuelanalysis (where this article also appears) - deliberately misrepresenting Interpol's statements. Interpol was so frustrated with this propaganda campaign that they issued a press release complaining about it. They simply highlighted what they had said from the beginning: "The [original] INTERPOL report clearly states that the overall conclusion of its experts was that "no user files have been created, modified or deleted on any of the eight FARC computer exhibits following their seizure on 1 March 2008’."
Did Dominguez somehow miss this comment in the original report and miss the follow up comments by Interpol in their press release? I doubt it.
This is really on the level of 911 troof conspiracy theories. Deliberate misrepresentations, smear jobs, and a failure to apply simple common sense. Would the Colombian government go to all the trouble of fabricating "more than 600 gigabytes of data, including 37,872 written documents, 452 spreadsheets, 210,888 images, 22,481 web pages, 7,989 email addresses, 10,537 multimedia files (sound and video) and 983 encrypted files (equivalent to 39.5 million filled pages in Microsoft Word and, which would take more than 1,000 years to read at a rate of 100 pages per day)" and then not bother to throw in smoking guns which incontrovertibly damned the Venezuelan and Ecuadoran governments, rather than the vague references and code words which could be interpreted to mean anything? No.