Eurasia Press & News
The UK’s closest ally in the Middle East was involved in corruption, a former ambassador has told a judge.
Sultan Qaboos, a UK ally who ruled the Gulf kingdom of Oman for half a century until his death in 2020, has been criticised in surprisingly frank terms by a senior diplomat responsible for protecting international relations.
Graham Hand, a former ambassador who now runs the Foreign Office’s censorship department, said of Qaboos: “His reign was a very ambiguous affair.
“There was certainly corruption and other regrettable matters that were not allowed, and should not be allowed to influence the pursuit of UK interests in Oman that are strategic.
“It’s a key country in that region, perhaps even more so than Saudi Arabia regarding its location next to Iran.”
Foreign secretary David Lammy visited Qaboos’ successor on Sunday to “celebrate that enduring bond” with Oman, where Britain has an array of military and intelligence bases.
Qaboos overthrew his father in 1970 and lived a lavish lifestyle with palaces across the country, a $500m superyacht and luxury mansion in Berkshire.
His close aides owned at least nine properties in England with a combined value of approximately £80m, Declassified previously found, including one purchased from footballer John Terry.
‘Slippery slope’
Hand made the comment about Qaboos at a tribunal in London last month during a transparency case brought by Declassified’s editor into Keenie Meenie Services, a British mercenary company that operated in Oman.
The diplomat said Qaboos was “replaced by his cousin Haitham through a process of some mystery” – referring to his heir being named in a secret will – and with the new Sultan making it “very clear that part of his mission is to protect the legacy of his predecessor.”
Haitham is “a modern man but a man of some pride in his country”, Hand told the court, adding: “It is considered very important by HMG [Britain] that that relationship should be protected at all costs.”
He said this dynamic “would feed into how our reviewers should deal” with what to censor, and expressed surprise that his colleagues had decided to release part of a file which revealed how KMS led the Sultan’s special forces on combat missions.
Hand, who runs a team of 49 censors, told the court: “I would have been inclined to redact that but it was not taken. Reviewers act autonomously, I train them but they make up their own minds.”
When asked by Julianne Kerr Morrison – a lawyer representing this author – whether the disclosure had damaged Britain’s alliance with Oman, Hand initially declined to answer until media had been evicted from the courtroom, saying “I think that question must be kept for closed”.
He told the Information Commissioner’s barrister John Bethell that this “reflects my caution on getting onto the slippery slope of what the British government may or may not do with the Omani government.”
However he then changed his position, telling Bethell in open court: “I will now confirm that I am not aware of any adverse reaction to the release of this document, but then I might not necessarily be aware of it as I work in the narrow field of sensitivity review.
“If the Government of Oman had summoned the British ambassador to give him a ticking off I would not know and it’s not likely it would be reflected back to me.”
Judge Neville then asked: “Are there mechanisms for keeping your sensitivity reviewers up to date, because if for instance Oman had been furious, that might influence other reviews?”
Hand said his staff read diplomatic telegrams and spoke to research analysts at the Foreign Office “to take account of the historical context”.
He added that “we have our standing guidance – the Green Book – 150 chapters long”, saying it was “a document that has grown organically” and alerted reviewers to “this particular case of Oman”.
‘Fertile ground for corruption’
The Foreign Office has refused to release the Green Book when asked by writer Andrew Lownie, although the Ministry of Defence published some of its equivalent manual, the Blue Book.
It has a section on “Arabian Peninsula and Gulf Sensitivity Issues”, which warns military censors to “note that in most Gulf countries the rulers, members of their family and many senior officials have been in office for a considerable period of time.”
Remarking on the fact that censorship staff are not told whether disclosures result in ambassadors being summoned, this author’s barrister said it was “concerning to us that there is essentially no feedback” loop and there appeared to be “something of a vacuum in which decisions are made”.
Foreign Office lawyer Stephen Kosmin argued it was “simplistic and unduly burdensome” for his client to be “expected to go out to your international partner and say ‘Chaps, how angry did you get last time around?’”
Despite Hand’s desire to censor files on Oman that are critical of Qaboos, some have slipped through the net.
A Foreign Office report on corruption in Oman from 1992 said British companies often had to pay bribes to win government contracts. UK diplomats believed money from bribery “goes largely into the pockets of Oman’s wealthy” and that it “most probably goes abroad”.
It stated: “There are no investigative journalists and no whistle-blowers here. There is, though, no doubt that many contracts are awarded for reasons other than of price and quality”.
It also said the Sultan’s royal court was “potentially fertile ground for corruption” and there was “no doubt that money has changed hands in pursuit of defence contracts…inevitably, British hands are far from clean”.
