How new is this?
by Chris Ames
This morning’s stories in the Sunday Telegraph rely on “dozens of ‘post-operational reports’ written by commanders at all levels, plus two sharply-worded ‘overall lessons learnt’ papers – on the war phase and on the occupation – compiled by the Army centrally.”
One quote from a secondary story suggests what one of the “lessons learnt” papers is:
“In Whitehall, the internal operational security regime, in which only very small numbers of officers and officials were allowed to become involved in Telic business, constrained broader planning for combat operations and subsequent phases effectively until Dec 23, 2002,” the documents say.
This can be found in paragraph 5 of the 2006 document UK stability operations in Iraq (PDF file) which was published on Wikileaks and previously reported in the Telegraph. And linked from the Digest’s Evidence page.
Andrew Gilligan notes in his main piece that the papers will almost certainly be seen by the Inquiry but that it is uncertain whether they will be published by it.
He makes a good point, but then neither has Telegraph published them, as far as I can see. That’s what the Digest and Wikileaks are here for.
3 Responses to “How new is this?”
Comment from Chris Ames
Time November 22, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Yes Iain, you are right that it is about timing. If Gilligan and the Telegraph can run a story and get attention on the back of the Inquiry, good luck to them. The interesting thing about the way that the media works is that if stuff does come into the public domain “under the radar” it can more or less disappear. But that is where things like the Digest come in.
I notice that the story is getting picked up elsewhere, including by the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8372807.stm
which says that the Telegraph is publishing the documents. But I don’t think they are.
Comment from Iain Paton (former RAF)
Time November 22, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Hutton is rightly criticised for the latter part of the inquiry and the conclusions, but the publication scheme and open hearings were commendable.
I hope the Telegraph publishes the documents if the Chilcot inquiry doesn’t. Most will be restricted, maybe confidential – Hutton published up to Secret as I recall. Can’t remember what Butler put out.
I’m sure Chilcot won’t want a trickle of revelations from the Telegraph in the same way they eked out the MPs expenses details!
Comment from Iain Paton (former RAF)
Time November 22, 2009 at 12:20 pm
I think timing is everything. These leaks can slip under the radar, but if they are aligned to the inquiry then there will be a public expectation that the material is reviewed and used to interview witnesses in public.
I doubt that the material leaked has the potential to damage operational effectiveness. I was at one “lessons learned” inquiry for a particular aspect of operations and I doubt the classification was above Restricted.
Sensitive material will relate to special forces and precise equipment capabilities. So these documents could be published by the Inquiry, redacted as required. I’d expect the Telegraph to publish and be damned if the Chilcot inquiry drags its heels….as for MPs expenses!