Response to The Guardian (UK)
Mr. Booth:
We are disappointed and more than a little perplexed as to why 1) you are demanding that we answer questions about documents that you are refusing to allow us to see or verify their authenticity and that you now seem to admit you don’t even have in your own possession, 2) you are refusing, despite repeated requests, to provide us basic information (including the name of your editor) on this story, and 3) despite asking a series of questions about the accuracy and sources of information relating to the present troubles in Ras Al Khaimah, you refuse to afford us the time and opportunity to sit down with you and review the very material being discussed.
In short, you seem to have no interest in substantively hearing from us, but instead seem only interested in going through the bare-minimum motions of appearing objective.
From the beginning, the purpose of this project has been to shine a public light on His Highness Sheikh Khalid’s positive message of peace, security and prosperity for the people of Ras Al Khaimah, the United Arab Emirates and the United States and issues of concern surrounding the current regime in Ras Al Khaimah which affect the security and stability of the region. All we have ever asked for – in fact, aggressively sought – is objective and responsible journalistic inquiry into the state of affairs in Ras Al Khaimah and whether that presents a clear and present threat to the people of Ras Al Khaimah and the interests of both the United Arab Emirates and United States.
While we are delighted that you have taken an interest in Ras Al Khaimah, we remain puzzled as to why, if you were truly interested in responsibly making sure that the Guardian is in a position to provide accurate information to its readers, that you are approaching the story in such a way – especially since we are offering to provide information of great interest to your readers about the role of the current regime in Ras Al Khaimah in sanctions-busting financial and logistical support of Iran and other illicit activities of grave concern to the United Kingdom and the entire world.
Again, as the answers below reflect, we are happy to answer your questions - but disappointed in your refusal to approach the story in a responsible manner in keeping with the high journalistic standards of the UK. We fear your approach, on top of the horrific BP debacle, risks further eroding the so-called “special relationship” our two great countries have enjoyed.
Attached Documents:
America’s Cup
Ras Al Khaimah: A Gateway to Trade with Iran
Ras Al Khaimah: A Rogue State Within the UAE?
Letter to Paul Butler, Akin Gump re: RAK Ceramics and Khater Massaad
Answers to your questions are as follows:
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
Documents seen by The Guardian suggest the campaign has involved some serious claims about RAK. A paper circulated by Glenn Ignacio on 3 Feb 2010 called the RAK Strategic Security Initiative states, among other things, that RAK is the “center of gravity” for “potential terrorist funding for Al Qaeda, Taliban, El Shabaab, etc,” and a “thoroughfare for blood diamonds from the Congo”. The country is “a point of entry for terrorists, (as proven with the terrorist attempt on the Burj Dubai)” and “a base of operation allowing Iranian personnel to operate within the confines of the UAE”. It says “RAK’s open and loosely controlled ports provide supply lines to counter any Iranian sanctions imposed by the international security.” What is the basis for these claims and are you comfortable that these claims are correct?
Over the last year, our team has publicly released a series of well-sourced, well-publicized reports regarding the state of affairs in Ras Al Khaimah, its devolution into a staging ground for illicit activity and its apparent role as a trade and financial gateway for Iran. We also compiled a report related to Ras Al Khaimah and the America’s Cup, which was provided to media outlets.
All three are attached. These reports were researched and written by highly respected American reporters, Glenn Simpson and Sue Schmidt. Glenn is a former investigative journalist for the Wall Street Journal and Sue Schmidt is a former Pulitzer-winning news reporter for the Washington Post.
The reports include citations and descriptions of their analyses. Much of the information is based on publicly-available source material and prior news accounts.
Moreover, there is additional information in which you may be interested: the attached document signed by the President of Iran indicating that Iran and the state-controlled RAK Ceramics are in fact in business together; a Canadian news story based on Canadian intelligence documenting that goods potentially used in a nuclear weapons program are being sent to Iran through Ras Al Khaimah ports; and stories detailing various terrorist-related activities which have taken place in Ras Al Khaimah.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
The Ignacio paper also alleges that drug smuggling planes from Afghanistan touch down in RAK. Is this correct?
As a former member of the U.S. Air Force Special Operations, Glenn Ignazio has twenty-plus years of military and international security-related experience, including stints as an advisor to both U.S. and foreign government officials. His firm has provided invaluable on-the-ground analysis of security planning which could potentially be taken to halt the flow of arms, money and illicit goods between Ras Al Khaimah and Iran and protect the people of Ras Al Khaimah.
As noted, several reports reflected this information and have been actively shared with various audiences, including U.S. government officials, media outlets, think tanks and other members of the U.S. national security/foreign policy community.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
RAK is likely to deny many of these claims which might lead to the implication that the campaign is attempting to smear RAK. Would you like to comment on that allegation?
See attached, what representatives of the regime stated several months ago -- and our response.
Since we provided the attached response we have heard nothing from these legal representatives. The letter speaks for itself -- why not ask the regime’s representatives why they never responded?
Please come back to us if and when you have a specific quote or “allegation.” Obviously, we would be shocked – shocked -- to hear that Sheikh Saud would deny the undeniable: published reports of publicly available police records related to his conduct in Minnesota; reports in major media outlets about terrorist activity in Ras Al Khaimah; or the reported findings of respected government intelligence agencies.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
RJI Strategies Inc suggested a plan to "embarrass and humiliate Sheikh Saud in front of his own people and call into question his fitness for leadership” by highlighting to the Associated Press, Reuters and Business Wire news agencies, the arrest in 2005 in Minnesota of Sheikh Al-Qasimi on suspicion of sexually assaulting a hotel houskeeper. Did this happen and would you like to comment on the tactic?
Please let us know if you are disputing the public reports and police records pertaining to activity in Minneapolis involving the current regime.
Additionally, please let us know the date of the document to which you are referring. RJI is not currently working on this project and was never retained for issues raised by your question -- instead they worked with Glenn Simpson and Sue Schmidt in terms of assisting with the compiling of research.
Issues regarding the conduct of the current regime had already generated significant media coverage and coverage in Ras Al Khaimah.
Although we obviously cannot validate the authenticity, we can only surmise that you might be referring to a proposal submitted by a third party contractor – a proposal we might have never seen, with a scope of which we did not approve
This leads us again to ask: why are you refusing to show us the documents that you claim to have? We have no way to authenticate or give context to the “facts” behind your questions.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
RJI also offered to “publicize credible stories in print, radio and television networks” on “RAK serving as a venue for channeling prohibited items procured by Iran’s nuclear weapons program”, “RAK as a haven for criminal activity”, “RAK as a transshipment point for conflict diamonds” and money laundering and the flow of large sums of Russian and Central Asian money through RAK”. QUESTION: what is the basis for these claims and are you comfortable that these claims are correct?
We have received a number of proposals from various organizations seeking to work to promote truth, justice, and the best interests of the people of Ras Al Khaimah and U.S. national security interests. RJI was not retained by us for work of this nature or scope. Rather, we used our existing team to compile and distribute reports, reach out to U.S. government and business leaders and interact with the media to highlight His Highness' Sheikh Khalid's vision and plans while raising issues of serious concern about the current regime in Ras Al Khaimah.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
It has been put to you by Der Spiegel that Sheikh Khalid paid at least $3.7m to California Strategies.
Is this correct?
Whatever our firm has been paid has been properly reported under applicable United States laws, although it is our fervent belief that you cannot put a price on truth and justice.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
Notes for a speech by Sheikh Khalid to the Washington DC National Press Club in February drawn up by Californian Strategy state that RAK has allowed RAK to devolve into a rogue state and strategic gateway for Iran and that “published reports in the Gulf region have repeatedly indicated that Iran has taken advantage of our free trade zones, using them as a transfer point to smuggle cargo, including arms, electronics, weapons parts, drugs and even humans to Africa, Europe and Asia.”
Did this speech take place, what is the basis for these claims and are they correct?
Yes, it did. In fact, the written remarks were widely available and distributed on the day it occurred. The content of the speech is based on the report researched by Glenn Simpson which we referred to earlier.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
On the involvement with the cancellation of the America's Cup, a document dated 11 November entitled Research update states: “RAK-America’s Cup. Our information was used by the Oracle legal team.”
What was this information?
The information is the same contained in the RAK-America's Cup report attached here and which we broadly disseminated without any hesitation.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
Did the campaign place the story in any media outlets about the alleged terror plot on Burj Dubai?
We did not learn of the specifics until seeing the news reports. That said, we indeed have worked closely with any number of new outlets -- and continue to work closely with a significant number of outlets -- that have either written or are at this very moment pursuing stories of great interest as it relates to U.S. national security interests, Ras Al Khaimah and Iran.
Of course, it should be noted that the Guardian is working in the same manner with sources right now on this story. Again, we urge the Guardian to give us a chance to authenticate the information that appears to have been conveyed to it by unnamed sources who may be motivated to create fraudulent or fabricated documents.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
On the goal of the campaign, there are repeated references to Sheikh Khalid retaking power. Ignacio's report says that his "intent: is to institute security measures upon transition to power" and the Cal Strat memo of 11 December 2009 states the mission is to "continue to put Abu Dhabi in a position of either having to stand by the current regime or make a change.” Is the goal regime change?
On behalf of His Highness Sheikh Khalid, we have maintained from the very beginning that he is the legally recognized Crown Prince and Deputy Ruler of Ras Al Khaimah (a copy of the legal decree is available on His Highness’ website) and that, in 2003, His Highness Sheikh Khalid was forced from office because of his historic opposition to Iran, desire for stronger ties with the U.S. (including making Ras Al Khaimah port infrastructure available to the U.S. given its strategic location on the Strait of Hormuz) and commitment to improving the quality of life for the people of Ras Al Khaimah (such as economic participation and women's rights).
We are committed to the application of the rule of law in Ras Al Khaimah and the return of His Highness Sheikh Khalid to his lawful position - which is clearly in the best interests of the United Arab Emirates, the United States, the people of Ras Al Khaimah, and to all those who seek stability in the region -- and to that end we will never, ever stop in our effort to stand up for the rule of law.
GUARDIAN QUESTION:
Is this a legitimate role for a US company such as Cal Strat to play in respect of a foreign state?
That depends on your view of the world. If you believe in the peace, prosperity and security of the region and in protecting U.S. national security interests, of course. If you are pro-Iran or believe that the questionable activities in Ras Al Khaimah which have been highlighted should be allowed to move forward without any concern, then you would probably not approve our activities.
Given that the United Arab Emirates Federal Government is a strong ally of the United States and committed to the best interest of the people of the United Arab Emirates, including the people of Ras Al Khaimah, one of our objectives has been to ensure that the Federal Government has access to information regarding the fact that the current regime in Ras Al Khaimah is engaging in conduct -- especially as it relates to Iran -- that is detrimental to the best interests of the United Arab Emirates. We have great respect for the Federal Government and are confident that it will, as always, make the right decisions and act in the best interests of all the people of the United Arab Emirates.
Best,
U.S. Communications Team for His Highness Sheikh Khalid bin Saqr Al Qasimi, Crown Prince and Deputy Ruler, Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab Emirates.