House of CommonsFour former British ambassadors to the United States have expressed concern about the future of intelligence sharing with the US following the re-election of Donald Trump.
Sir David Manning, who served as ambassador between 2003 and 2007, told a parliamentary committee some of Trump’s appointees had “strange track records” which would create a “problem on the intelligence front”.
Dame Karen Pierce, who only left the role last month, said intelligence sharing would continue “even if at the top level there might be things we might wish to be circumspect about”.
Sir Nigel Sheinwald, ambassador from 2007 to 2012, said the relationship would be “trickier to handle than probably at any other time”.
He said some of the people appointed by Trump to lead intelligence and security could “present some difficulties in terms of their view of us and views of co-operation”.
He did not specify who he was referring to, however concern has been raised about the US president’s pick to be his director of national intelligence.
Tulsi Gabbard has previously echoed Russia’s justification for invading Ukraine and her appointment to the role was welcomed by Russian state media.
Earlier this year Lewis Lukens, a retired American diplomat, told the BBC that Gabbard’s “dubious judgement” could give allies “reason to question how safe it is to share intelligence with the US”.
During her confirmation hearing with US senators, Gabbard dismissed suggestions she was “Putin’s puppet” as “lies and smears”.
The ambassadors’ warnings came during an evidence session with the House of Lords’ International Relations and Defence Committee which heard from four former British diplomats to the US.
Sir David told peers that if the UK wanted to be the “go-to ally” for the United States it had to have “something to offer”.
He said the UK’s military resources were stretched and the “defence card” was “not the ace it once was”.
Lord Soames said the UK was still “very, very, very good” at intelligence and security and asked if that would still play a role in the UK-US relationship.
Sir David said the question of intelligence-sharing was going to be “more difficult to approach”.
“Clearly if you have some Trump supportees in these key jobs who have very strange track records and have said very strange things about Nato allies and the Nato alliance and you have people in the administration who seem to be looking for ways of appeasing Russia then you have a problem on the intelligence front.
“That is a big question mark against how the special relationship is sustained during the Trump administration.”
Dame Karen said the way the US and UK helped each other was “unique” adding: “There is an interoperability that you don’t find with any other ally.”
Asked if that would last under the Trump presidency, she replied: “The intelligence part of the relationship is so valuable it will last – even if as David was explaining – at the top level there might be things we might wish to be a bit circumspect about.”
Sir Nigel said “the nature of the people at the top of the US intelligence and security apparatus today – the ones chosen by President Trump – I think that may present some difficulties in terms of their views of us and views of co-operation.”
“This is going to be trickier to handle than probably at any other time.”
Sir Peter Westmacott, who was in Washington from 2012 to 2016, said problems might be caused by a changing culture in US government institutions adding that “a lot of very good people are being thrown out because they do not pass the loyalty test.”
However, he also told the committee that it was not unheard of for intelligence to occasionally be held back from allies “even when you have the most perfect working political relationship”.
“There are moment when because of the risk of an inadvertent leak to a journalist or something specific source information for example is held back.”
