British man arrested for alleged terrorism offence and spying on RAF base in Cyprus

A British man has been arrested on suspicion of espionage and terrorism offences in Cyprus.
He allegedly surveilled the RAF Akrotiri base on the island and is suspected of having links with Iran's Revolutionary Guards, local media reported.
RAF Akrotiri is the UK's most important airbase for operations in the Middle East.
The Philenews website said the man was arrested on Friday after intelligence he was planning an imminent terrorist attack.
The man appeared before a district court on Saturday, which ordered he be detained for eight days pending inquiries, Reuters reported. Police told the news agency they would not be releasing further details, citing national security.
He is alleged to have lived in a flat in Zakai, Limassol, close to Akrotiri, and was observed near the base carrying a camera with a long lens and three mobile phones.
The suspect is also alleged to have had the Cyprus's Andreas Papandreou airbase, in the western region of Paphos, under surveillance since mid-April, the country's ANT1 news portal reported.
Local reports suggested he was Azerbaijani but the UK Foreign Office said they were working with the authorities over the arrest of a Briton.
A Foreign Office spokesperson said: 'We are in contact with the authorities in Cyprus regarding the arrest of a British man.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Times

an hour ago

• Times

The missing link in the grooming gangs report: cousin marriage

When the US Department of Defence set up an interrogation unit at Guantanamo Bay after 9/11, it conducted a detailed study on the suspected terrorists it held. Agents wanted to understand the links between them, the way they had worked together, the better to infiltrate their wider networks. They found nothing. Diddly squat. They conducted audits, led themselves on a merry dance, but achieved zilch. • 'Wrongly prosecuted' grooming gang victims denied compensation Then they hired someone who understood the culture of the people they'd apprehended; someone steeped in Arabic mores. She instantly spotted a pattern in the names of the suspects. A startlingly high proportion were from two clans: the Qahtani and the Utaybi. When she mentioned this to her DoD colleagues, their first question was: what the hell is a clan? Only after she explained the significance of these social institutions, the subtle pattern of names that indicate clan affiliations and the codes of honour and secrecy that make them powerful vehicles for group action did they see the point. The agents were then able to infiltrate the networks and prevent future atrocities. Why am I telling you this? Well, because I read Baroness Casey of Blackstock's report on the rape gangs scandal with rising levels of frustration — indeed much the same emotion with which I read her 2016 report on social integration. I don't doubt Casey's work rate or integrity. But I think that, somewhat like the DoD at Guantanamo, she couldn't see what was before her eyes because she lacked the appropriate analytical lens. • 'Whitehall tried to block Rotherham grooming scandal exposé' You see, to understand many of the most urgent failures of integration, you need to understand the clan. These groups are held together not just by ideology or religion; they are cemented by cousin marriage, a common practice in Arabic cultures and, in the UK, many Pakistani immigrant communities, particularly those hailing from Kashmir. By marrying within small, tightknit groups, they ensure everything is kept within the baradari, or brotherhood — property, secrets, loyalty — binding clan members closer together while sequestering them from wider society. In her 2016 report Casey rightly talked about the failure to speak English, honour beatings and the like, but she missed the point that many of these problems are a function of marriage practices that isolate communities. The academic Patrick Nash of the Pharos Foundation has written of baradari life 'concentrated in small geographical areas spread across a few streets or nearby neighbourhoods where there is little need or opportunity to have much to do with wider society or practise the English language'. To write a report on failures of integration without seeing the link with cousin marriage is, I suggest, like writing on the power grid without noting the significance of electricity. • How the grooming gang report detailed abusers' ethnicity Casey's report on the rape gang scandal was flawed for the same reason. It was a strange experience to read her words as she edged ever closer to grasping the point without quite getting there. She noted that the problem is disproportionately concentrated among British Pakistanis. She even noted that 'two thirds of suspects offended within groups' that were 'based on pre-existing relationships — mainly brothers and cousins'. But then, stunningly, she suggested that these links were 'unsophisticated' and 'informal'. Anyone who studies these things — one thinks of Michael Muthukrishna at LSE — could have told her that this is the unmistakable pattern of clan-based crime: groups whose links are anything but informal and unsophisticated. Charlie Peters, who has investigated this problem for GB News, told me: 'The deeper you probe, the more you see the presence of clans. We know that such communities are more likely to see others as outsiders, of less moral value and, when it comes to young white girls, fair game. The perpetrators also knew that they could commit crimes without getting dobbed in since loyalty is owed to the clan but not victims. In some cases, abusers were aided by relatives in authority.' Nash put it this way: 'Cousin marriage sustains close-kin networks which incentivise clan members both to dehumanise out-group victims and to suppress knowledge of criminal activity to preserve family honour.' • Grooming gangs 'still at large, and the victims aren't believed' A couple of examples. Last year, Shaha Amran Miah, 48, Shaha Alman Miah, 47, and Shaha Joman Miah, 38, were convicted at Preston crown court of horrific abuse perpetrated in Barrow-in-Furness and Leeds. Yes, these were Pakistani men, but they were also brothers within an overarching baradari. In Rotherham in 2016, Arshid, Basharat and Bannaras Hussain groomed and raped children for nearly 20 years while Qurban Ali was found guilty of conspiracy to rape. Three of these men are brothers and Ali is their uncle. I have long advocated a ban on cousin marriage but should perhaps say that I've never regarded it as a panacea. Improving integration requires so much more: ending mass uncontrolled immigration, amending legal frameworks to stop the boats, deporting foreign criminals, not to mention other policies supported by large majorities but serially ducked by politicians. A ban on consanguinity would, though, be of huge value. American states with bans tend to be more prosperous and faster-growing. Nations with bans are richer and more integrated, with less corruption and lower rates of crime. A ban would also reduce the prevalence of the congenital diseases causing untold suffering in Kashmiri immigrant communities from Bradford to Luton. The good news is that Kemi Badenoch has adopted this as Tory policy after campaigning by her colleague Richard Holden, and a poll for YouGov last month showed that 77 per cent of the British people are in favour of a ban (only 9 per cent oppose it). But here's what astounds me: Labour remains against prohibition, despite (I am told) having read the evidence. Why? How? Permit me to suggest that I glimpse through the façade of prevarication a party still terrified of criticising any cultural practice out of fear of appearing racist. Isn't that why it was mute for so long on female genital mutilation and honour beatings and still can't bring itself to describe the burqa as a pernicious symbol of institutional misogyny? In other words, the reason the grooming scandal was not confronted for so long by both main parties (not to mention the police and social services) — namely, the fear of seeming bigoted for investigating ethnic minorities, even while they were gang-raping young girls — is still alive and well in the British government. As the son of a Pakistani immigrant who integrated into this nation (not least by marrying my mum) and came to love it, I find this sickening. One can perhaps forgive Casey for missing the significance of cousin marriage, given that it is a custom with which she is unfamiliar (although, frankly, she should have done her homework), but there can be no excuse for politicians who put cultural sensitivities before basic decency. So I say to Starmer, Hermer, Cooper et al: examine your consciences. Did you really go into politics to be apologists for the worst kind of moral relativism, to acquiesce in the nihilistic pretence that all cultural practices are of equal value, when they emphatically are not? If not, find your backbone, confront the Muslim bloc vote and ban cousin marriage. The alternative is betrayal of the most heinous kind. For here's a thought to focus minds: girls today, even as you read these words, are being abused by ethnic clans operating in this country. Fail to act now, and this is on you.

The Independent

4 hours ago

• The Independent

Brit arrested in Cyprus accused of spying

A British man has been arrested in Cyprus on suspicion of espionage and terrorism offences. He is alleged to have been monitoring the RAF Akrotiri base and is suspected of having links with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Intelligence suggested the man was planning an imminent terrorist attack, leading to his arrest on Friday. The man was reportedly observed near RAF Akrotiri, a critical UK airbase for Middle East operations, carrying a camera with a long lens and multiple mobile phones. The UK Foreign Office is in contact with Cypriot authorities regarding the arrest of the British national.

Times

4 hours ago

• Times

Iran is a direct threat to Britain — Israel's fight is ours too

Too many politicians treat the world like a student union. Abstract, simplistic and completely disconnected from reality. The world is not a debating club. It is a dangerous place where power matters, where democracy is fragile and where enemies don't play by the rules. That's why we need to be clear: supporting Israel is not just right — it is necessary for our own national security. Israelis are at the front line in the fight for the West and for our shared values. First, Iran is a direct threat to the UK and has been for years. Our security services have stopped multiple Iranian terrorist plots and assassination attempts on UK soil. Its ballistic missiles can reach Europe. We should support any ally that seeks to damage Iran's nuclear programme and eliminate the threat posed by the terror-exporting Revolutionary Guards. Anti-British sentiment is almost as central to the ayatollahs' deranged ideology as their obsessive hatred of Israel and the United States. They use the term 'Little Satan' interchangeably to refer to both the UK and Israel. Iran uses influence through mosques, schools and fake charities to radicalise and corrupt our own population: taking advantage of our democracy to advance its theocracy. • Iran's 'insidious propaganda network' on British soil revealed Second, Iran and Israel are not moral equivalents. Israel is a vibrant democracy that protects women and minorities and encourages them to vote, speak and dissent. In Iran women are brutalised by a theocratic dictatorship. Their ability to travel and work is restricted. They are beaten for showing their hair. Tortured for asking questions. Executed for demanding freedom. Anyone who can't see the difference between a liberal democracy and a terrorist regime needs to spend less time on social media and more time understanding reality. When Iran launched its latest barrage of missiles, it didn't target military installations. It targeted city centres. High rise housing. Hospitals. Civilians. This is a war crime, plain and simple. No excuses. No spin. And still, we have western politicians giving copy-and-paste statements as if this were a playground spat between equal players in a 'cycle of violence'. Israel's response, in contrast, is surgical. It decapitated Iran's offensive capabilities with extraordinary precision and minimal civilian casualties. Images of holes made by guided bombs in the sides of flats occupied by specific regime operatives are testament to Israel's values. When Iran attacks, millions of Israelis hide in bomb shelters. When Israel attacks, Iranian dissidents record the impact against regime targets and cheer. Military strategists will be studying this campaign for decades as a model for how to defend your people without losing your moral compass and in compliance with international law. Israel has a right to defend itself. Iran has been openly committed to the destruction of Israel for decades. Through its proxy, Hamas, the regime orchestrated the murder of 1,200 people on October 7 and has said it would do it again. Any democracy facing such an existential threat from a genocidal regime would and must act to defend itself. Most Arab nations understand this; some say it openly. Many ordinary Iranians bitterly oppose their regime which for 46 years has been robbing them of their future. They know that Israel is not the problem. They condemn violence, yes, but they have no time for the delusions of the western left. They've had enough of people in Islington pretending to speak for Gaza while doing nothing for peace. • Inside the Iranian opposition, from a rapper to the Shah's son But of course, the usual crowd in Britain and beyond rushed to condemn Israel. They ignore the facts. Because it's not really about Israel — it's about their own moral posturing. While Israel takes on the arrayed enemies of the West, fighting terrorism on multiple fronts, and facing Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Iran at once, their so-called allies condemn them. Nigel Farage warned that 'Israel is running out of friends', while sharing discredited Hamas death toll figures to show 'why the international community struggles'. The SNP and Liberal Democrats offered vague, hand-wringing commentary with zero understanding of the world we live in. But we are up against ideologues armed with drones, not dinner party dilemmas. Most egregious of all is the weak and morally deficient Labour government, continually singling out Israel for punishment for daring to exercise its right to self-defence. While our ally faces an existential threat and takes on our enemies, Keir Starmer and David Lammy vacillate and equivocate, and Lord Hermer imposes his own interpretation of international law. This moral cowardice hurts us as a nation. It damages trade ties, harms vital intelligence co-operation with Israel which keeps us safe, drives a wedge between us and our allies and empowers an Iranian regime that views Britain as its enemy. This is not what responsible governments do. Due to this Labour government's hostility towards Israel, bilateral relations have deteriorated to such an extent that Britain was not even informed about the attack on Iran. We are no longer trusted and are viewed as unreliable. Lammy's confused antics diminish us on the global stage. A strong nation is clear about its interests and the threats it faces. Labour does not have the moral clarity to see this. Their vision is blurred by Starmer's inability to make up his mind on anything, and his political need to pander to foolish views. It is this same weakness that drives them to undermine and surrender core British interests in the Chagos Islands. Support for Israel is not about sentiment. It's about security, sovereignty and survival. We stand with Israel because it shares our values. Because it defends itself against terrorists who have their sights on us, too. Because if we don't stand with democracies under attack, we embolden those who hate everything we stand for. And what we see now is a weak UK emboldening its enemies. The attack on Israel is part of a broader assault on Western values. An assault on free, democratic countries from an axis of authoritarian states. Their fight is our fight.