Many
Americans do not understand the NSA disclosures and fall into a
juvenile and narcissistic (1) explanation based on an endless diet of
“evil CIA conspiracies to murder the president and destroy friendly
freedom loving countries” plot meme of American movies and
TV Shows. The reality is so much less interesting but in ways that,
sadly, require a bit of history to appreciate
and that has never been an American strong point.
This problem of "NSA explanation" extends to our allies in the West who for some reason want to know what is going on and do not trust us, How funny that an American should have to remind Europeans about history, how very ironic. These same Europeans are always lecturing us about their superior knowledge of history as learned in elite European universities, something us poor Yanks could never hope to understand given our inferior breeding. This history reminder is especially odd in the case of the United Kingdom. Surely we can count on them for understanding?
This problem of "NSA explanation" extends to our allies in the West who for some reason want to know what is going on and do not trust us, How funny that an American should have to remind Europeans about history, how very ironic. These same Europeans are always lecturing us about their superior knowledge of history as learned in elite European universities, something us poor Yanks could never hope to understand given our inferior breeding. This history reminder is especially odd in the case of the United Kingdom. Surely we can count on them for understanding?
Well,
yes and no. The more informed of us realize that the NSA
disclosures involve operations that are shared with and in part
originated with the British and various members of their
Commonwealth, but even our well-bred friends seem to have slipped a
bit and forgotten that one of the unusual aspects of post 1945
intelligence is the cooperation between the US, the UK and their
Commonwealth, a cooperation that, to everyone's surprise, survived
the last world war and continues to this day. In other words, its
not "us vs them" in this case, it is more likely to be some version of
“us vs us” when the full story comes out, if it ever does.
But
I speculate, and in the great tradition of retroactively finding
meaning in works of art and fiction, I have noticed an oddly
plausible discusssion for some of what we know about the NSA disaster
in a venerable, indeed perhaps penultimate, spy movie from the Cold
War, The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965) as directed by
Martin Ritt from a novel by John le Carre, aka David Cornwell, a
veteran of British M.I. {5, 6}.
Control discussing intelligence methods with Leamus in The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965)
Although
the movie does not discuss anything like the NSA disclosures it does
contain words of wisdom, I think, for how people in the Intelligence
Community see this sort of thing.
The
movie is remarkably faithful to the book, and both are confusing as
can be which touches on some of the ambiguity and complexity of
the real Cold War. It seems to me that one should not have to worry
about spoilers in a movie that came out in 1965, especially to
readers of this blog, but the fact is that not everyone has seen this
fabulous, if depressing, movie. The good news is that one can
discuss major elements of the film and not give anything away, you
will still be confused unless you read and/or watch this film
several times and spend some time thinking about it.
But
fortunately, the scene in question is near the very beginning of the
film, and gives very little away except perhaps upon reflection in
light of other developments. It is the briefing between the
protagonist, Leamus, and his boss in British intelligence, whose work
name is Control. In this briefing, Leamus has returned from Berlin
where he has just seen the collapse and death of one of his networks,
and is meeting with his boss to see if he will be retired, or
transferred to a non-operational job, or given another assignment in
the field.
As
we have discussed earlier in this blog, I believe that one of the
greatest of all devices in the history of the cinema is the device of
The Explanation. In this scene, the head of the British Foreign
Intelligence service explains to an agent some of the rationale
behind their work.
I
have put the scene up at Youtube, until they take it down, education
not being seen as a valid excuse for Fair Use no matter what Congress
or the FCC may say. I have also provided a transcript below. The
italics are mine. You may watch this scene here.
Control:
Would you like a drink?
Leamus:
No, I'll wait.
Control:
You can still do that?
Leamus:
(startled at Control's rudeness)
Control:
I wondered whether you were tired, burnt out.
Leamus:
(silence)
Control:
Well this phenomenon we understand here. Its like metal fatigue.
We have to
live
without sympathy, don't we. You can't do that forever. One needs
to come in,
in
from the cold.
Leamus:
I'm an operator, Control. Just an operator.
Control:
There is a vacancy in banking section that might suit you.
Leamus:
Sorry, I'm an operational man. I'll take my pension, I don't want a
desk job.
Control:
You don't know whats on the desk.
Leamus:
Paper.
Control:
I want you to stay out in the cold a little longer. Please do sit
down.
Control:
Our work as I understand it is based on a single assumption that the
West is never
going
to be the aggressor. Thus, we do disagreeable things, but they
are defensive.
Our
policies are peaceful but our methods can't afford to be less
ruthless than those
of
the opposition. Can they?
Leamus:
(silence)
Control:
No, I'd say that since the war our methods, our techniques that is,
and those
of
the communists have become very much the same.
Right. I mean, occasionally,
we have to do wicked
things. Very wicked things indeed. But, uh, you can't be less
wicked than your
enemies simply because your government's policies are benevolent,
can you?
Leamus:
(silence)
Control:
What I have in mind for Mundt is a little out of the ordinary.
You haven't met
have
you?
Leamus:
Mundt? No.
Control:
He was here in 59 posing as a member of the East German steel
mission.
Leamus:
I was in Berlin.
Control:
And, uh, how do you feel about him?
Leamus:
Feel?
Control:
Yes.
Leamus:
He's a bastard.
Control:
Right.
Those
students of the filmmaking arts will notice that this is not a pure
Explanation as it also makes good use of those tired narrative
cliches of foreshadowing, well-written dialogue and great acting.
This
movie also has several great examples of the art of the Explanation
beyond the one already cited. Another one can be found here, but
trust me, this one is a spoiler if you have not seen the film.
So
in conclusion, I would like to suggest that this fictional discussion
from the cold war should serve to remind us that our faithful public
servants are often aware of the moral ambiguity of some of their
work. Also, in judging this situation without solid knowledge let us
not forget that, generally speaking, the NSA is on our side.
The
Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965) on IMDB
________________________________________________
1.
The great narcissism of the American Public is revealed in the
presumption that the NSA has nothing better to do than to gleefully
and egregiously spy on them as if the NSA was an infinitely resourced
department of the Divine Will that watches over every one of
God's, or the IRS's, creatures. Unlike Santa Claus, he knows when you
are sleeping, he knows when you're awake, not.
