Did the Chinese Run a Honeytrap Operation on the British Government?

You can't rule it out, but isn't it possible the thing was stolen just because it's a BlackBerry?

A top aide to Gordon Brown has been a suspected victim of a “honeytrap” operation by Chinese intelligence agents.

The aide, a senior Downing Street adviser who was with the prime minister on a trip to China earlier this year, had his BlackBerry phone stolen after being picked up by a Chinese woman who had approached him in a Shanghai hotel disco.

The aide agreed to return to his hotel with the woman. He reported the BlackBerry missing the next morning.

The aide, whose identity is known to The Sunday Times, immediately reported the theft to the prime minister’s Special Branch protection team and was informally reprimanded.

A senior official said yesterday that the incident had all the hallmarks of a suspected honeytrap by Chinese intelligence. The incident will raise fresh questions about the security of sensitive official information. It follows a spate of high-profile cases where data from government departments have been lost.

BlackBerrys are used as mobile telephones and also store data and send and receive e-mails. Downing Street BlackBerrys are password-protected but security officials said most are not encrypted.

I don't think encryption would have helped much--it's not going to stop an intelligence agency from getting at what's on it, especially the Chinese. If this was a case where a randy aide went back to his hotel with a woman that he shouldn't have, that's an opportunity to remind people that they can be targeted by intelligence agents. Was there a briefing? Did this individual get fired? How did the British handle this, I wonder.

And that reminds me of the case of the DC Madam--and why it was so critical to know who her clients were and why their security clearances should have been revoked for paying for sex.

--WS

Why The Litvinenko Case Still Matters

I don't know whether it is because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or our own lawlessness here at home, but the transformation of Russia into a virtually lawless state has escaped real notice in America. Do people realize that there simply is no justice system in Russia? That the Russian government simply kills people who criticize it? Relations between Russia and Great Britain are still strained because of the case of Alexander Litvinenko, who was poisoned with polonium and died in November, 2006.

But going public with an accusation like this (and another one that the Russians scouted out another London-based critic, Boris Berezovsky) is another matter and it will raise the diplomatic temperature.

Whether the comments were timed deliberately or whether they just came out in the course of a conversation with the BBC journalist is not clear. Sometimes, these revelations are not the result of a careful decision but just emerge and have all kinds of unexpected repercussions.

It is a reminder that all is certainly not well in the relationship between Russia and Britain and, beyond that, between Russia and the West in general.

It will dash any hopes that the meeting at the G8 in Japan between the two prime ministers, Gordon Brown and Dmitry Medvedev, might have started a new chapter.

The talks were in any case, according to a Russian official, "sharp" at times as Mr Brown raised the various issues clouding the relationship - the outstanding extradition request, the restrictions on the British Council and the Russian manoeuvres against BP [British Petroleum].

Did President Bush raise any substantive questions with Medvedev when they met with one another? Or did they have other things to talk about? Or is he operating under the assumption that Putin is still running Russia?

I think that's the safest assumption of all.

Brown Announces Further Drawdown of British Forces

Gordon Brown made his first major foreign policy speech to Parliament today, and while he had everyones attention, he basically told George Bush to "bugger off."

As if we needed more evidence that aWol Bush is indeed the worst president ever, he has managed to alienate Britain, our closest historic ally.

About a week ago, Gordon Brown announced that he would be cutting the British presence in Iraq to 5000. The White House responded predictably - that is to say - petulantly. A Bush aid announced that Britain was no longer Bush's greatest ally, and then slandered the British forces. “Operationally, British forces have performed poorly in Basra,” said the official. “Maybe it’s best that they leave. Now we will have a clear field in southern Iraq.”

"Well, fine then." Was apparently what Gordon Brown had to say about that.

Today, Gordon Brown announced that the British presence will be cut further, to a total troop strength of 2500 by spring. Those 2500 will be serving in a support role.

Later on, after Brown's appearance before Parliament, one of his top aids told a reporter that he would not be surprised if all british forces are out of Iraq before the end of 2008.

The White House response to being told to get buggered was more measured today than it was last week. "This is consistent with previously announced plans by the British to reduce their troop presence in southern Iraq as the Iraqi security forces are able to take lead responsibility in the southern provinces," Said Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for the White House National Security Council. What accounts for the more reticent response today is anyones guess.