The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy denied, on Thursday 30 April, that a report on disinformation following Chinese pressure (see EUROPE 12475/22) had been altered.
“I can assure you that no changes have been made to the published version to accommodate a third party actor, in this case China. The disinformation campaign conducted by States is clearly mentioned, including China, and there has been no watering-down of our findings”, he assured MEPs on the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs, adding that the report had not been written under pressure.
The High Representative acknowledged, however, that the Chinese authorities, when they became aware that a document was going to be published, “expressed their concern through the diplomatic channels”. “For sure, they were not happy. They will continue not being happy”, he added.
Noting that he only learned of the situation after the press articles had been published, Mr Borrell explained that he had carried out checks and that, on the basis of those checks, “no pressure led to any reformulation of a text that should have been published”. He therefore also denied having given orders to change the report, as he was not aware of the situation.
Asked about the postponement - by a few days - of the publication of the document, the head of European diplomacy explained that the content and timing of the publication were the result of a decision of the diplomatic service, which had not bowed to pressure from anyone.
According to Mr Borrell, there has been a misunderstanding, because there are actually two reports: one intended for internal use and the other for public use. “Some say the second publication is the first publication amended. This is not the case, these are two different texts, intended for two different audiences”, he stressed. The High Representative recalled that this famous report “gives a complex picture, including aggressive and misleading rhetoric from international actors, including China and Russia, but also the Syrian regime and the Iranian Government”.
And while several MEPs felt that “the damage was done” whether the report was watered down or not, Mr Borrell refused to accept that the credibility of his institution was damaged by this story. He regretted that an e-mail forwarded by a member of EU StratCom was more important than all the work of the institution.
The High Representative took the opportunity to recall that EU StratCom had 38 members, with an annual budget of 6 million euros, and that it depended solely on the MEPs, who were co-legislators on the budget, to provide the service with more resources. (Original version in French by Camille-Cerise Gessant)