I understand that amongst the latest batch of hacked documents from the Institute of Statecraft’s Integrity Initiative is one that lists me as part of their team. Given how many queries from journalists I’ve been fielding, I thought it would be easier all round for me briefly and publicly to address this for once and, hopefully, for all.
Back in January 2018, IoS co-director Chris Donnelly reached out to see if I would be interested in perhaps being involved with a proposal they were making for funding to address Russian information operations. We had a chat, I made some comments, and I said that I’d be glad to be involved in some way if the project got off the ground, depending on quite how it evolved.
And that was it. I never heard any more, so I don’t know if the bid was successful or not. I have no other relationship with the II or the Institute of Statecraft.
In fairness, the II has whittled a number of rods for its own back. It is extremely untransparent: while its motto seems to be “Information is the basis of democracy. Without information, there can be no informed debate, and no informed decision-making,” at the same time the II website gives no names of anyone involved, who funds it, etc. (Were this the case of some anti-mainstream site, many would regard that as implicit proof of shadowy connections.)
They are also connected with a range of other initiatives, some of which are – in my opinion – deeply unprofessional or at the extreme end of the Cold War spectrum. And tweeting against Corbyn was just stupid in the circumstances, regardless of the rights and wrongs of that specific situation.
But.
A few ill-judged tweets do not an anti-Labour political black ops infowar make. Nor does FCO funding demonstrate any kind of nefarious intent. The FCO funds all kinds of projects, some smart and some stupid, some political and some purely cultural. Given that there can be no doubt that there is a Russian political-information campaign being waged, through open media and covert influence, it is right and proper that measures are taken to understand and respond.
I have no idea if the Integrity Initiative is a good choice for this. I have no idea if it is not. But just as I often find myself wishing those determined to find a nefarious Muscovite hand behind everything that goes wrong, from Brexit to football hooliganism, dialled down their reflexive Russophobia and thought a little more sharply about the purely domestic crisis these incidents reflect, in this case I can only hope that those determined to present the II as some anti-left smear factory, instead think that maybe there are genuine and understandable reasons why Jeremy Corbyn’s stance on Russia could be alarming. As someone who regards himself as being on the left of the political spectrum, I certainly would be alarmed were his statements to be manifest as British foreign policy.
villagekeepers598e587d5a
/ December 19, 2018Mark; I appreciate your forthrightness in addressing this topic. However, I find your response not nearly pointed enough, and almost to be an effort to blunt the truth of this matter. Where did the 2 million get spent? The building even LOOKS like a dowdy troll factory. Integrity Institute ? Get real. ROBERT ECKART
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 3:10 AM In Moscow’s Shadows Mark Galeotti posted: “I understand that amongst the latest batch of > hacked documents from the Institute of Statecraft’s Integrity Initiative is > one that lists me as part of their team. Given how many queries from > journalists I’ve been fielding, I thought it would be easier all” >
Mark Galeotti
/ December 19, 2018So much nonsense is generated these days by people substituting assumption for knowledge. I have no idea how II spends its money.
villagekeepers598e587d5a
/ December 19, 2018Yes, it seems obvious. But innuendo and spillover, in this digital age, can wreck a good academic ‘ s reputation. I’m glad, honestly happy, that you got out in front of this.
Mark Galeotti
/ December 21, 2018Thanks!