Latest news with #DeclassifiedUK
Russia Today
7 days ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
Soft power, hard cash: How the UK secretly buys influencers
There is something profoundly grotesque about a government that funds 'freedom campaigns' through secret payments to social media stars, complete with non-disclosure agreements forbidding them to reveal who's really pulling the strings. Yet that's precisely what Britain's Foreign Office has been caught doing. A recent investigation by Declassified UK revealed that the UK government covertly paid dozens of foreign YouTube influencers to promote messages aligned with British foreign policy – under the familiar, pious banners of 'democracy support' and 'combating disinformation.' Of course, those slogans sound wholesome enough. Who wouldn't be in favour of democracy or against lies online? But this framing is the point: it launders raw geopolitical interests into the comforting language of values. In reality, this is simply propaganda. Slick, decentralised, modernised – but propaganda nonetheless. This covert campaign didn't happen in a vacuum. It's merely the latest incarnation of Britain's longstanding approach to managing inconvenient narratives abroad. During the Cold War, the UK ran the notorious Information Research Department (IRD) from the bowels of the Foreign Office, quietly subsidising global news wires, encouraging friendly academics, even feeding scripts to George Orwell himself. Back then, it was about containing Soviet influence. Today, the rhetorical targets have shifted – 'Russian disinformation,' 'violent extremism,' 'authoritarian propaganda' – but the machinery is strikingly similar. Only now, it's all camouflaged beneath glossy behavioural science reports and 'evidence-based interventions.' Enter Zinc Network and a clutch of similar contractors. These are the new psy-ops specialists, rebranded for the digital age. Zinc, in particular, has become a darling of the UK Foreign Office, winning multi-million-pound tenders to craft campaigns in Russia's near abroad, the Balkans, Myanmar and beyond. Their operational blueprint is remarkably consistent: conduct meticulous audience research to understand local grievances, find or build trusted social media voices, funnel them resources and content, and ensure they sign binding agreements not to disclose their British backers. A few years ago, leaked FCDO documents exposed exactly this approach in the Baltics. There, the British government paid for contractors to develop Russian-language media platforms that would counter Moscow's narratives – all under the pretext of strengthening independent journalism. They weren't setting up local BBC World Service equivalents, proudly branded and transparent. They were building subtle, local-looking channels designed to mask their sponsorship. The goal was not to encourage robust pluralistic debate, but to ensure the debate didn't wander into critiques of NATO or London's chosen regional allies. This is the moral sleight-of-hand at the core of such projects: democracy is not the intrinsic end, it's the vehicle for achieving Western policy objectives. When the UK says it's 'building resilience against disinformation,' it means reinforcing narratives that advance British strategic interests, whether that's undermining Moscow, insulating Kiev, or keeping critical questions off the table in Tbilisi. Meanwhile, any rival framing is instantly demonised as dangerous foreign meddling – because only some meddling counts, apparently. It is deeply revealing that the YouTubers enlisted by the Foreign Office were compelled to sign NDAs preventing them from disclosing the ultimate source of their funding. If this were truly about open civic engagement, wouldn't the UK proudly brand these campaigns? Wouldn't London stand behind the principles it professes to teach? Instead, it resorts to precisely the covert playbook it decries when wielded by adversaries. In truth, 'disinformation' has become an incredibly convenient term for Western governments. It carries an aura of technical objectivity — as if there's a universal ledger of truth to consult, rather than a constantly contested arena of competing narratives and interests. Once something is labelled disinformation, it can be suppressed, countered, or ridiculed with minimal scrutiny. It is the modern equivalent of calling ideas subversive or communist in the 1950s. Likewise, 'freedom' in these projects means nothing more than the freedom to align with Britain's worldview. This is a freedom to be curated, not genuinely chosen. And so local influencers are groomed to shape perceptions, not to foster independent judgment. The fact that these influencers look indigenous to their societies is the whole point – it's what gives the campaigns a deceptive organic legitimacy. This is why Zinc's approach hinges on meticulous audience segmentation and iterative testing to find precisely which messages will most effectively shift attitudes. The aim is to secure agreement without debate, to achieve consent without the messy business of authentic local deliberation. This should worry us. When liberal democracies resort to covert influence, they hollow out their own moral authority. They also undermine public trust at home and abroad. If London can so easily rationalise deception in Tallinn or Tashkent, why not someday in Manchester or Birmingham? Already, parts of the behavioural 'nudge' industry that grew out of these foreign adventures have found eager domestic clients in public health and law enforcement. The biggest casualty in all of this is genuine democratic discourse – the thing that such operations claim to protect. Because what these programmes actually protect is a carefully policed marketplace of ideas, where uncomfortable questions are outflanked by well-funded, astroturfed consensus. And so long as Britain continues to cloak its strategic propaganda efforts in the soft language of freedom and resilience, citizens everywhere will remain less informed, less empowered, and more easily manipulated. If that's what modern democracy promotion looks like, maybe we should be honest and call it what it is: camouflage propaganda, draped in the rhetoric of liberty, but designed to ensure populations think exactly what Whitehall wants them to think.
The National
15-07-2025
- Business
- The National
Probe launched after MPs accept cash from Israeli arms firm
The National previously told how the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Defence Technology – a cross-party group of MPs – took at least £1499 from RUK Advanced Systems Ltd, a weapons firm which is owned by the Israeli government. RUK Advanced Systems Ltd makes missiles for urban warfare, and is part of Israel's state-owned defence giant, Rafael. READ MORE: Arms firms are buying exclusive access to MPs for as little as £1499 It is against parliamentary rules for APPGs to "accept the services of a secretariat funded directly or indirectly by a foreign government". On Monday, Declassified UK reported that the parliamentary standards commissioner has now launched an official investigation into "due diligence of funding". It is understood that one of the APPG's co-chairs, Conservative MP Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst, referred the case himself after being contacted by Declassified UK. Shastri-Hurst is a practicing barrister and currently sits on Westminster's Standards Committee. When the donation was first reported by Declassified UK, neither the APPG nor any of the MPs involved in the group responded to a request for comment. However, the outlet reported that RUK Advanced System Ltd's name was immediately removed from the group's website. The firm also appeared to delete its website, which remains offline at the time of writing. While RUK Advanced System Ltd describes itself as a "UK company", it is controlled by the Israeli government's ministry of finance, which is led by far-right politician Bezalel Smotrich, who was sanctioned by the UK Government last month for inciting "extremist violence" against Palestinians. The firm's corporate structure has since been changed on Companies House, although it remains under the control of the Israeli government. READ MORE: 'Unacceptable': SNP hit out as Labour 'keep Tory-era veto on Scottish laws' The defence APPG was created in January and has already been sponsored by at least 37 arms firms, including industry titans Leonardo and Lockheed Martin. Leonardo, which has a factory in Edinburgh, is known to have produced targeting systems for Israel's F-35 fighter jets, which have been used to bombard Gaza. Lockheed Martin – the world's largest arms company – also contributes parts to F-35 fighter jets. There are 30 MPs involved in the APPG, five of whom are from Scottish Labour: Gordon McKee (Glasgow South), Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar), Lillian Jones (Kilmarnock and Loudon), Kenneth Stevenson (Airdrie and Shotts) and Chris Kane (Stirling and Strathallan). Other MPs on the group include Fred Thomas (co-chair), Sarah Bool (officer), Anna Gelderd (officer), Luke Akehurst and Iain Duncan Smith.
The National
08-07-2025
- Politics
- The National
Top BBC journalist fumes as Gaza spy planes media blackout revealed
A BBC journalist was left fuming as the corporation was found to have ignored the scandal of British spy planes being deployed over Gaza. The National, in conjunction with the investigative website Declassified UK, this week published an expose of the failure of the mainstream media to look into RAF planes being deployed over the besieged territory. The investigation revealed that despite being aware of the phenomenon, broadcasters such as the BBC have displayed a remarkable lack of curiosity about the spy planes. Outlets have simply parroted the official line that the flights are for the purposes of tracking down Israeli hostages captured by Hamas. Concerns have been raised frequently that the flights may also be used to support Israel's genocide against the Palestinian people – or that defence chiefs have gathered evidence on this but have turned a blind eye. READ MORE: Lisa Nandy aide 'drafted note saying BBC is institutionally antisemitic' Responding to the story's author Des Freedman, the BBC's defence correspondent Jonathan Beale got his hackles up. He said: 'Please tell us Des as to how we can get the classified intelligence only you seem to know about. Why teach media studies when you can clearly scoop us all?' One user pointed out that in October last year, Beale himself had noted that the reconnaissance flights 'must have witnessed so much more', adding: 'Why don't you do some actual journalism rather than stenography?' John McEvoy, Declassified UK's chief reporter said: 'You can quite easily see the RAF's spy flights over Gaza on flight tracking sites including radarbox and flightradar. 'Did you not know this, Jonathan? You're the BBC's defence correspondent!'
Days of Palestine
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Days of Palestine
Over 500 British Spy Flights Over Gaza in Support for Israeli Genocide
DaysofPal—Verified British reports have revealed that the Royal Air Force (RAF) has conducted over 500 intelligence flights over the Gaza Strip since December 2023, under the pretext of 'locating hostages,' amid growing concerns that the gathered intelligence may be indirectly supporting Israeli military operations. According to Declassified UK, the reconnaissance flights—carried out by Shadow R1 aircraft—have departed from Britain's Akrotiri airbase in Cyprus, and have continued almost daily until mid-2025, including during temporary ceasefires. These flights, equipped with advanced imaging and surveillance systems, have sparked widespread controversy among UK human rights groups and members of Parliament, particularly after some missions coincided with Israeli airstrikes that killed civilians, including British aid volunteers in Gaza. While the British government insists the missions are solely intended to 'assist hostage rescue efforts,' human rights organizations warn that sharing such intelligence could render the UK legally complicit in operations that violate international law, including potential war crimes. Several MPs have called for an independent public inquiry, similar to the 'Chilcot Inquiry,' to investigate Britain's possible role in supporting military actions in Gaza, particularly through intelligence sharing or the supply of F-35 fighter jet components. Human rights reports indicate that these jets—of which Britain manufactures up to 15% of the parts—have been repeatedly used in airstrikes targeting civilian areas within Gaza. The UK High Court recently dismissed petitions demanding an end to these exports, ruling the matter as 'sovereign.' International law experts caution that continued support—whether intelligence-based or military—could expose London to global legal scrutiny, especially if it is proven that this support contributed to civilian deaths. Shortlink for this post:
The National
03-07-2025
- Politics
- The National
The National set to launch collaboration with Declassified UK
Declassified UK, founded in 2019 by Matt Kennard and Mark Curtis, has published a wealth of stories exposing the UK Government's complicity in Israel's assault on Gaza. In particular, its small team of journalists has made waves with its focus on how the UK continues to send spy flights and share the information collected with the Israeli military – despite describing the Israeli government as "extremists". Elsewhere, Declassified has published agenda-leading stories challenging the Defence Secretary on the UK's involvement in Gaza and revealing how MPs have accepted cash from an Israeli arms firm. On Monday, we will put out our exclusive collaboration with the team in print and online. The National team is excited to be working with these determined, fearless journalists on a project which other media outlets have yet to fully delve into. Honest, in-depth reporting on UK foreign policy can be hard to come by, but Declassified's work investigating Britain's military and intelligence agencies has shown that there are crucial stories to be told. Its website states: "Declassified UK is independent, relying on the public and trusts and foundations for our finances, and beholden to no-one. "Our journalism informs British citizens what is being done in their name and challenges the establishment in the interests of the public, penetrating Britain's secret state."
