HOW A DUBIOUS CIA DOCUMENT IS FUELING TENSIONS IN CATALONIA
30
September, 2017
TENSIONS
ARE RUNNING high
in Barcelona. Last month saw a terrorist attack on one of the city’s
main thoroughfares, Las Ramblas, which killed a dozen people and
injured more than 100. At the same time, Barcelona and the greater
region of Catalonia are a day away from an independence referendum
that has pitted the Catalan and Spanish governments against each
other in a way unseen since the fall of Franco’s military
dictatorship in the 1970s.
The
central government in Madrid is bent on preventing the Oct. 1
referendum: in the last
week,
Spanish military police have shut down multiple websites associated
with the referendum, and raided newspaper offices, TV stations and
print shops in search of the ballots and ballot-boxes to be used in
the vote. The Spanish interior minister has attempted to seize
control of the Catalan police. Meanwhile, two ferries docked in
Barcelona’s port are housing thousands of riot police that Madrid
has said it plans on using to physically stop the vote. Spanish
police have arrested at least a dozen members of the Catalan
autonomous regional government and others involved with the
independence movement, threatening charges of “sedition“ and
“rebellion.“
Last
month, as the referendum fervor was heating up, leading Spanish daily
newspaper El Periódico published a document alleging that the CIA
had warned the Catalan police about a potential attack in Barcelona.
The document stated that three months before the attack, the CIA had
warned the Catalan police, the Mossos d’Esquadra, of
“unsubstantiated information of unknown veracity“ pointing to a
summer attack in Barcelona. The document (pictured below) named Las
Ramblas as a potential target.
The
revelation had huge implications—if true, it would represent a case
of gross negligence on the part of the Catalan police and evidence
that Catalonia’s president, interior minister, and police chief had
lied to the public. But El Periodico’s initial story unraveled
quickly: Soon after its publication, local journalists questioned the
veracity of the document. Supposedly authored by the CIA, it was
plagued with spelling and formatting errors typical of Spanish
speakers. Even WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange tweeted that
he thought it looked fake.
The
publication of the document raises many questions. If it is indeed
fake, was it created by El Periódico, or did the newspaper get spun
a fabrication by an outside source who was intent on undermining
trust in Catalonia’s authorities? Just over one month after the
attacks in Barcelona and prior to Catalonia’s impending referendum,
The Intercept has delved into the strange case in an effort to shine
light on the murky origins of the alleged CIA report.
The
story started as a blip in the live coverage of the attack on Aug.
17, 2017. Less than one hour after a large van had rammed through
crowds of people on Las Ramblas, El Periódico published an
entry on its live blog stating that the “CIA warned the Mossos two
months ago that Barcelona, specifically [Las Ramblas], could be the
location of a terrorist attack like the attack that happened today.”
At the time, dead bodies were still scattered across the street’s
pedestrian center.
El
Periódico wasn’t the only Spanish newspaper publishing articles
trying to prove that police had been warned of a potential attack. In
the days following the incident, for example, El País ran
a story stating
that Belgian intelligence had alerted the Mossos about one of the
attackers earlier this year. But the El País report was quickly
debunked. Still, the Spanish and Catalan press were eager for the
police negligence story.
El
Periódico published the
first document on Aug. 31, which it claimed was a section of a CIA
report about a potential attack in Barcelona. Days earlier,
Catalonia’s president and interior minister had both made public
statements saying that there had been no warning from the CIA, in
response to El Periódico’s post on the day of the attack.
Josep
Lluís Trapero, head of the Mossos, held a press conference to say
the same, though he added one small detail—the Mossos did receive a
warning in May about a potential attack in Barcelona, but it wasn’t
from the CIA and it was sent to all levels of Spanish police. Trapero
said that the Mossos, alongside the Spanish national police, military
police and counterterrorism officials, had all determined the notice
to be of “very low quality.” And either way, Trapero insisted, El
Periódico’s document was false.
Still,
the story was picked up all over Spain and internationally.
Politicians and journalists accused Catalonia’s president, interior
minister, and police chief of lying to the public about the alleged
CIA warning. Each of the three officials were responsible for
critical aspects of Catalan governance and all three supported the
independence movement. With the Oct. 1 referendum looming, the
accusations of negligence and misinformation were significant and
damaging.
Enric
Hernàndez, director of El Periódico, backpedaled in response to
questions about the document’s veracity. In an interview
with a
Catalan radio station on the same day he published the purported CIA
warning, Hernàndez stated that the document was authored by the CIA,
but said that it was the U.S. National
Counterterrorism Center,
not the CIA, that had sent the warning to the Catalan police.
Hernàndez
added that the warning had also been sent to other Spanish police
forces. When asked why he had singled out the Mossos for criticism,
he avoided the question. And he bizarrely blamed email encryption for
the typos and formatting errors that had appeared in the document.
The
following day, Sept. 1, Hernàndez published another article about
the alleged CIA warning, including what he called a complete version
of the document. The document was similar to the original, with some
of the typos corrected. The accompanying
article no
longer mentioned the CIA, and instead adopted a more generic term:
“American intelligence.” Hernandez said the document had been
sent from the National Counterterrorism Center to the Mossos and also
to CITCO, Spanish counterterrorism police.
As
the backlash continued, Hernàndez revised his story again. The
published document, he said, wasn’t an original after all—the
newspaper had created it based on the text of the original. Hernàndez
maintained that his source had, just before publishing, requested
that the original document not be published. So El Periódico
mocked-up its own version.
Josep
Lluis Trapero, chief of the Catalan regional police “Mossos
D’Esquadra” and Interior Minister for the Catalan government
Joaquim Forn, left, give a press conference in Barcelona on Aug. 31,
2017.
Hernàndez
stands by his reporting on the case. He said in an interview with The
Intercept that the only error El Periódico made was to not initially
state that the purported CIA document was an inauthentic version that
the newspaper’s staff had recreated.
According
to Hernàndez, he first heard about the alleged CIA notice from two
sources in the Catalan government on two separate occasions in late
May. (In interviews with other media, Hernàndez has said these two
conversations took place in June.) The first source, he says, tipped
him off to the existence of the warning, and the second, a day later,
read him its contents. Both sources said the warning was from the CIA
and had been sent to the Mossos raising alarm about a potential
attack in Barcelona. Hernàndez says he was not physically shown the
document in either meeting.
Journalists
at El Periódico began investigating further, Hernàndez says, after
the Catalan president, interior minister and police chief denied the
existence of a CIA warning in the days following the attack. That’s
when, he says, they obtained the alleged document. Hernàndez would
not discuss whether or not he tried to verify the document with
sources in the U.S.
“This is a debate between truth and lies.”
“We
had two sources,” Hernandez explains, “so either they both
deceived us in the moment, and this warning was never sent and was an
invention, or [the Catalan officials] deceived the public by denying
the existence of the warning.”
Hernàndez’s
battle seems almost personal: “If on Aug. 20, the president of the
[Catalan government] hadn’t denied the existence of the warning, we
wouldn’t have looked further into it,” he says. “This is a
debate between truth and lies.”
The
CIA and Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not
respond to repeated requests for comment. Press officers from the
National Counterterrorism Center refused to speak about the case.
However,
in response to a request under the Freedom of Information Act, the
National Counterterrorism Center did
state that
it had no record of any communications sent in 2017 between its
office, Spanish counterterrorism police, or the Mossos.
Hernandez
argues that the communication was classified, and thus there would
have been no record available under FOIA. But Sally Nicholson, FOIA
Chief for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the
agency responsible for National Counterterrorism Center records, says
that in the case of her agency, that is not how it works.
“If
there had been communications but they were classified, the FOIA
response would have said so,” Nicholson explains. “If you have a
request for something that an agency can’t admit to doing, can’t
confirm or deny, you still get that answer. You’ll get ‘we can’t
confirm or deny, because just by confirming or denying it would give
out a classified fact.’”
“If
we had an exclusion for records, we would cite the exclusion in the
response,” Nicholson adds, “in this case, there are no exclusions
that are being cited.”
People
stroll on Las Ramblas in Barcelona on April 23, 2017.
Photo:
Josep Lago/AFP/Getty Images
Las
Ramblas is like Barcelona’s Times Square—one of the city’s
central streets and tourist destinations. As much now as before the
attack, the street’s pedestrian walkway, which leads from the
city’s central square to the Mediterranean sea, is constantly
packed with tourists, street vendors, restaurants and the occasional
artist. Even before the attack, police flanked either side of the
entrance, sporting submachine guns and military-style police van.
After
the attack, police quickly found plans for what would have been a
larger, more deadly atrocity: the detonation of a rental truck full
of gas canisters next to the Sagrada
Familia,
another one of Barcelona’s famous landmarks. That plan
was foiled when
the person modifying the gas canisters set them off prematurely in a
house about 120 miles south of Barcelona.
For
people on both sides of the Catalan independence movement, the
Barcelona attack came to represent a grave example of the other
sides’ failings, explains Josep Àngel Guimerà, a journalism
professor at the Autonomous University of Barcelona. Separatist press
argued that there was a lack of communication between Spanish and
Catalan counterterrorism police, says Guimerà. For unionists—with
the help of El Periódico’s reporting—the attack came to
represent the failings of the Catalan police and three top figures in
the independence movement.
Guimerà
notes that journalists on both sides of the movement were quick to
react to the publication of the alleged CIA report. “All of the
media that stand opposed to the Catalan independence movement
believed Enric [Hernàndez, the director of El Periódico]. And all
of those that support the movement doubted him,” says Guimerà.
“There was an almost-automatic response on behalf of the media to
believe the warning or not.”
Another
issue is that Spanish media don’t typically fact-check their
articles or investigations, says María Ramírez, a journalist with
two decades of experience working for Spanish media. Ramírez is
quick to add that individual journalists do often scrutinize and
fact-check their own work, but it’s not a common practice.
“There
is no newspaper in Spain that has processes of fact-checking like in
the U.S.,“ Ramírez, now a journalism fellow at Harvard, explains.
“Typically [Spanish journalists], when a source passes them a
document, will publish it and that’s it. It would be much more
valuable to find another source and build a narrative to explain.”
“If
you just publish without checking,” she adds, “you’re not doing
your job for readers.”
Beyond
that lies another question: If the document is indeed false, who
created it?
Photo:
Carl Court/Getty Images
Journalist
Carlos Enrique Bayo, head of investigations at Madrid-based news
organization Público, has been working on cases like these for a
year and a half. In 2016, he and a colleague, Patricia López,
obtainedexplosive
recordings of
conversations that took place inside the office of Spain’s
then-Minister of Interior, Jorge Fernández Díaz.
The
publication of the conversations—in which Fernández Díaz and the
former head of the Catalan anti-fraud office can be heard discussing
a secret political police force—triggered a major investigation in
the Spanish Congress. Congressional investigators verified that
Fernández Díaz had, during his tenure as Spain’s interior
minister, created a covert police unit tasked with obstructing
corruption investigations into the conservative People’s Party,
which has been in government in Spain since 2011. According to the
congressional probe,
the political police also worked to investigate Fernández Díaz’s
opponents, among them people involved with the rising
leftist-populist movement in Spain and the independence movement in
Catalonia.
In
both cases, congressional investigators found that Spanish police had
leaked falsified documents to the press in order to discredit the
then-Interior Minister’s adversaries. Bayo notes that one of those
police, José Luis Olivera, now leads CITCO, the counterterrorism
agency that supposedly received the purported U.S. intelligence
document published by El Periódico. (CITCO did not respond to
requests for comment.)
Is
this a smoking gun? Bayo says no, it is not. But, he adds, it is
strange that “right now, a document would appear, written in
terrible English, that they say was sent by U.S. intelligence
directly to the Mossos, when evidently intelligence agencies
typically speak among each other.”
Josep
Àngel Guimerà, the journalism professor, agrees. While it is
impossible to be certain about what happened, he says he blames a
politically-minded leak and journalists who don’t fact check.
“I’m
sure there is a report somewhere that says generally that Las Ramblas
is a target,” Guimerà remarks. But, he adds: “Out of one grain
of sand, there are people here that have tried to build a mountain.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.