King’s College Academic Forced to Apologise Over Defamatory UAE Claims
Security analyst Andreas Krieg, Associate Professor at King’s College London, has been slammed into a public apology after making false and defamatory claims about top international media lawyer Paul Tweed. Krieg admitted Tweed was “collateral damage” in his anti-United Arab Emirates agenda.
Krieg Backs Down, Deletes Posts and Pledges Charity Donation
In a sharply worded statement on his X account, Krieg confessed he made “false, unfair and defamatory allegations” about Tweed in his book Subversion: The Strategic Weaponization of Narratives. He withdrew the claims “unreservedly,” apologising for questioning Tweed’s integrity and independence.
Krieg also confirmed he’d deleted previous disparaging posts about Tweed following court orders and agreed to donate to Reporters Without Borders at Tweed’s request as part of the settlement.
Lawyer Tweed Welcomes Victory: “Vindicated My Reputation”
“I am very satisfied with Dr Krieg’s unreserved and categoric apology to me before the High Court in Belfast,” Tweed said. “He admitted I was ‘collateral damage’ in his agenda against the UAE. It’s disappointing my professionalism was questioned in these circumstances.”
“I believe Krieg’s ties to Qatar should have been disclosed, and it’s troubling King’s College London promoted his book for years despite warnings about its content.”
“This was never about money. My sole aim was to clear my name. No compensation was pursued, but at my request, Krieg has made a donation to Reporters Without Borders.”
“No lawyer should be attacked for just doing their job. It undermines the rule of law and our legal system.”
Krieg’s Qatar Links Spark Questions Over Bias
Records reveal Krieg runs a company registered in Qatar, Stratagema LLC, where he holds significant roles. This fuels claims his work on the UAE was politicised rather than objective—an admission highlighted by his apology acknowledging Tweed as “collateral damage.”
The saga underscores the serious legal risks academics and social media users face when publishing damaging claims without solid evidence. It’s a stark reminder that both the courtroom and court of public opinion will hold reputations to account.
