Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

salon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 56 posts

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#11

Post by josu »

The pattern isn't described until the second to last paragraph. I'll just c&p:

>Thus one productive line of inquiry quickly yielded evidence: the differences in the way agency officers undercover as diplomats were treated from genuine foreign service officers (FSOs). The pay scale at entry was much higher for a CIA officer; after three to four years abroad a genuine FSO could return home, whereas an agency employee could not; real FSOs had to be recruited between the ages of 21 and 31, whereas this did not apply to an agency officer; only real FSOs had to attend the Institute of Foreign Service for three months before entering the service; naturalized Americans could not become FSOs for at least nine years but they could become agency employees; when agency officers returned home, they did not normally appear in State Department listings; should they appear they were classified as research and planning, research and intelligence, consular or chancery for security affairs; unlike FSOs, agency officers could change their place of work for no apparent reason; their published biographies contained obvious gaps; agency officers could be relocated within the country to which they were posted, FSOs were not; agency officers usually had more than one working foreign language; their cover was usually as a “political” or “consular” official (often vice-consul); internal embassy reorganizations usually left agency personnel untouched, whether their rank, their office space or their telephones; their offices were located in restricted zones within the embassy; they would appear on the streets during the working day using public telephone boxes; they would arrange meetings for the evening, out of town, usually around 7.30 p.m. or 8.00 p.m.; and whereas FSOs had to observe strict rules about attending dinner, agency officers could come and go as they pleased.

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#12

Post by EdwardCoffin »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #6

The most important of which was how officers in the field under diplomatic and deep cover stationed across the globe were readily identified by the KGB. A dirty little secret within the world of clandestine operations is that the majority of official-status officers (diplomatic or military cover) are known by the host country intelligence services. This is largely because you generally only take so much risk with ong…

> A dirty little secret within the world of clandestine operations is that the majority of official-status officers (diplomatic or military cover) are known by the host country intelligence services.

Do you have a citation that would support this?

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#13

Post by AndrewKemendo »

EdwardCoffin wrote: post #12
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #6

The most important of which was how officers in the field under diplomatic and deep cover stationed across the globe were readily identified by the KGB. A dirty little secret within the world of clandestine operations is that the majority of official-status officers (diplomatic or military cover) are known by the host country intelligence services. This is largely because you generally only take so much risk with ong…

> A dirty little secret within the world of clandestine operations is that the majority of official-status officers (diplomatic or military cover) are known by the host country intelligence services. Do you have a citation that would support this?

Nope, that's why it's a "dirty little secret."

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#14

Post by pavel_lishin »

EdwardCoffin wrote: post #3

> Any Soviet citizen had an intimate acquaintance with how bureaucracies function This makes me wonder whether there is any literature out of the Soviet Union on topics like this, kind of like how the U.S. produced works like Dale Carnegie's How to make friends and influence people .

If you find out how to very successfully navigate and game the type of bureaucracy in the soviet system, it's probably not in your best interest to either shout the fact from the rooftops, or to share your secrets with too many people.

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#15

Post by Spooky23 »

EdwardCoffin wrote: post #3

> Any Soviet citizen had an intimate acquaintance with how bureaucracies function This makes me wonder whether there is any literature out of the Soviet Union on topics like this, kind of like how the U.S. produced works like Dale Carnegie's How to make friends and influence people .

The Soviets weren't unique in terms of sprawling bureaucracy. Anyone attending a large public university is getting a similar experience, albeit with better food.

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#16

Post by Spooky23 »

EdwardCoffin wrote: post #12
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #6

The most important of which was how officers in the field under diplomatic and deep cover stationed across the globe were readily identified by the KGB. A dirty little secret within the world of clandestine operations is that the majority of official-status officers (diplomatic or military cover) are known by the host country intelligence services. This is largely because you generally only take so much risk with ong…

> A dirty little secret within the world of clandestine operations is that the majority of official-status officers (diplomatic or military cover) are known by the host country intelligence services. Do you have a citation that would support this?

Try Google.

This is pretty widely known phenomena, as in anyone who has read anything about cold war espionage is aware of it. This article confirms it through a source from the former KGB.

Here's a 1985 NY Times article detailing Soviet use of this ruse in Mexico: http://www.nytimes.com/1985/06/23/world/mexico-city-depicted...

Here's a 1983 NY Times article "Soviet Orders US Vice Consul Expelled as Spy": http://www.nytimes.com/1983/09/13/world/soviet-orders-us-vic...

Key quotes from the 1983 article:

>"The Soviet action against Mr. Augustenborg followed a pattern set twice earlier this year. In March, when Richard Osborne, a first secretary in the embassy's economic section, was expelled, and again in June, when Louis Thomas, an embassy attache, was ousted on spying charges, the Soviet announcements were issued promptly and said the men had been caught in the act on Moscow streets. Previously, such announcements had often been delayed or not made public at all."

>"...no American diplomat had been publicly expelled since 1977, and in that case, involving Martha Peterson, a vice consul at the embassy, there was no Soviet statement until 11 months later, after the United States had announced the arrest of two Soviet employees of the United Nations caught picking up documents on antisubmarine warfare."

>"The recent Soviet actions against Americans come at a time when Western counterintelligence services have stepped up their actions against Soviet agents. Nearly 100 Russians have been expelled for intelligence activities around the world ... Also in April, the United States expelled three members of the Soviet Embassy in Washington, including a military attache, Lieut. Col. Yevgeny N. Barmyantsev, who was reportedly caught retrieving what he thought were stolen American military secrets from beneath a tree in rural Maryland."

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#17

Post by EdwardCoffin »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #13
EdwardCoffin wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A dirty little secret within the world of clandestine operations is that the majority of official-status officers (diplomatic or military cover) are known by the host country intelligence services. Do you have a citation that would support this?

Nope, that's why it's a "dirty little secret."

... so how do you know, and why should I believe you?

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#19

Post by EdwardCoffin »

Spooky23 wrote: post #16
EdwardCoffin wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A dirty little secret within the world of clandestine operations is that the majority of official-status officers (diplomatic or military cover) are known by the host country intelligence services. Do you have a citation that would support this?

Try Google. This is pretty widely known phenomena, as in anyone who has read anything about cold war espionage is aware of it. This article confirms it through a source from the former KGB. Here's a 1985 NY Times article detailing Soviet use of this ruse in Mexico: http://www.nytimes.com/1985/06/23/world/mexico-city-depicted... Here's a 1983 NY Times article "Soviet Orders US Vice Consul Expelled as Spy": http://www.…

Unless I missed something, those articles just give specific examples of agents being uncovered. Nothing is given to indicate how many remained uncovered. Its a pretty long jump from examples of such to the general statement that "the majority of official-status officers" being known by their host countries.

Re: The KGB’s success identifying CIA agents in the field

#20

Post by ptaipale »

EdwardCoffin wrote: post #3

> Any Soviet citizen had an intimate acquaintance with how bureaucracies function This makes me wonder whether there is any literature out of the Soviet Union on topics like this, kind of like how the U.S. produced works like Dale Carnegie's How to make friends and influence people .

I think that Ilya Zemtsov's Encyclopedia of Soviet Life could be entertaining reading for you.

Excerpts here: https://books.google.fi/books?id=XFje-RiHeisC&pg=PA302&dq=en...

Post reply on HN