UK assessment of Sri Lanka based on civil society and media, too – Lord Goldsmith

Minister of State for Foreign Affairs in the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Lord Zac Goldsmith has said that there was no blanket requirement for information to be independently verified before being submitted to London.

Minister Goldsmith has said so in response to Lord Naseby seeking an explanation as regards the responsibilities et al of British Defence Attaches against the backdrop of the UK government dismissing reports submitted by wartime UK defence attache here Lt. Col. Anthony Gash.

Lord Naseby has asked the following question on April 21: whether the information contained in despatches written by UK defence attachés must be independently verified before submission; if so, whether it is standard practice to ensure that such attachés are briefed to that effect; and if so, what record, if any, they hold of Lieutenant Colonel Gash, being so briefed.

Lord Goldsmith who also serves as Deputy to the Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab has provided the following answer on April 29: “Reports from UK Military attachés and diplomats take a wide variety of forms. Some report events which they have directly observed; some report the views or assertions of others; some focus on judgements or provide analysis. There is no blanket requirement for information to be independently verified before submission, which in many situations will not be possible. The context of reporting will inform the weight that is attached to it. Reports from our defence attachés, together with many other sources, contribute to the UK government’s overall understanding of events overseas.”

Lord Naseby, also on the same day has asked what sources they used to inform their assessment of the situation in Sri Lanka during the civil war in that country between 1 January and 18 May 2009.

Lord Goldsmith responded: “The UK government’s assessment of the situation in Sri Lanka during the civil war was informed by a broad range of internal and open source reporting, including from our High Commission in Colombo, international organisations, civil society and media.”

In respect of the Sri Lanka Armed Conflict, Lord Naseby has asked  what criteria they used to assess the credibility of evidence reports they have received which related to the situation in Sri Lanka during the civil war in that country between 1 January and 18 May 2009; and whether it has ever been their practice to accept reports from unnamed sources.

Lord Goldsmith has responded: “Reports from UK Military attachés and diplomats take a wide variety of forms. Some report events which they have directly observed; some report the views or assertions of others; some focus on judgements or provide analysis. These, along with other sources, contribute to the UK government’s overall understanding of events overseas.

Lord Naseby has asked the Government whether  further to the despatches written by Lieutenant Colonel Gash, the former defence attaché of the British High Commission in Sri Lanka about events in that country between 1 January and 18 May 2009 relating to the civil war, whether they consider all reports by UK military attachés and diplomats to be evidence based-assessments.

Lord Goldsmith has responded: “Reports from UK Military attachés and diplomats take a wide variety of forms. Some report events which they have directly observed; some report the views or assertions of others; some focus on judgements or provide analysis. These, along with other sources, contribute to the UK government’s overall understanding of events overseas.” (SF)