arms-d@ucbvax.ARPA (05/07/85)
From: Harold G. Ancell <HGA@MIT-MC>
Arms-Discussion Digest Volume 3 : Issue 28
Today's Topics:
Oops!
Special Komitet Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnasti Issue #1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: The Moderator
Subject: Problems mailing the last digest and issue on the KGB
Two problems occurred when I mailed the last issue: one, I used the
old copy of the mailing list, so recent requests to be added weren't,
and two, various problems caused the From: field to be <Moderator
<ARMS-D@MIT-MC> @MIT-MC> which caused problems with at least one
target mail system. Sorry. Now things should work better, with half
of the mail being sent from BRL, and half from MC.
With regards to the KGB, I'd like to recommend a very good book I've
read recently: KGB Today, The Hidden Hand, by John Barron. Almost
half of it is devoted to the story of KGB Major Stanislav Levchenko,
who defected in 1979 from the KGB; I couldn't put the book down while
reading that section. It includes a very detailed account of his
cultivating agents of influence in Japan, and the sort of damage they
can accomplish.
- Harold
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 85 20:41:20 EDT
From: Herb Lin <LIN@MIT-MC>
Subject: More dupe-to-dupe explanation.
From: Jeff Miller AMSTE-TOI 4675 <jmiller at apg-1>
When it comes to providing our ground and air forces with
advanced anti-tank weapons, I will gladly carry you on my back
through the halls of Congress to push it through, if that would
do it. It would of course mean overall increases in force levels,
which would help balance the threat in Europe. Nuclear weapons of
any kind are merely bargaining chips, valuable in their sinister
way,only by deterrance and trade-off. I harbor an ex-soldier's
unshakable instinct that tactical nuclear weapons of any type,
rather than offseting numerical superiority, will lead to intra-,
and intercontinental escalation.
Nice to see that we can agree on some things.
My sarcastically expressed concern is not over the ERW as
"the ultimate anti-tank weapon", rather, over the fact that this
highly useful bargaining chip, which was greatly feared by the
Soviets ( FACT; if you want to hear more, I suggest we get
together in a public place), was effectively cancelled by a
large-scale intelligence campaign.
I assume you mean a Soviet propaganda campaign? I believe it.
This is not to say there is anything wrong in being anti-
nuke.
Glad to hear it.
So the argument that goes: "so what if the KGB
is influencing my cause as long as its right?" is empty because
it fails to recognize that the KGB isn't helping fund and
organize because it is concerned with peace or morality, but
because it is a handy means to harm the US.)
I guess I don't understand your point. If, for example, the KGB were
to help fund the various programs here in the U.S. that try to find
missing children, would you object? We might imagine that the KGB's
ulterior motives could include inducing a false sense of confidence in
the American people about their ulterior motives, and so on. Should
these programs accept Soviet funding? I would say yes.
Final point; I've been going back through the ARMS-D
archives. Herb Lin complaining about somebody not providing
substantive analysis! What a hoot!!
If you would care to point out previous submissions of mine, I would
be glad to identify them as random ravings, the results of careful
analysis, or those of ten minutes thought. I *do* perform analyses,
but not for everything. If you have a complaint about a submission of
mine, let's hear it, and let's see what kind of analysis you would
want for you to say "yes, that's a substantive analysis even if I
don't agree with the conclusion." (I assume you believe that is
possible -- true?)
herb lin
------------------------------
Date: 30 Apr 1985 10:49:55 EDT (Tuesday)
From: Jeff Miller AMSTE-TOI 4675 <jmiller@apg-1>
Subject: Komitet Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnasti
Mr. Lin;
I siezed upon one thing in your message which I strongly
feel needs emphasis:
When I said the disinformation and Active Measures campaign
conducted by the KGB to influence the freeze movement (as well as
other groups) was an intelligence campaign, I meant just that.
Although the propaganda organs are routinely involved in support
of such efforts, the actual command and control, and primary
operational responsibility derive from the First Chief
Directorate, which really broadly speaking, conducts all overseas
operations of KGB. The 12th Department of this directorate
utilizes the most promising officers from all directorates,
departments and services, selected primarily for ideology,
linguistic ability, and education in target cultures, for the
purposes of intensive agent-recruiting, compromise of hostile
groups ( e.g. Trade unions in E. European countries, government
officials in Western countries ) and disinformation.
Again, let me try to communicate the harm done when any
group is thus penetrated. The KGB is looking not only for a short
term propaganda coup, as you seem to think, nor do they stop at
the practice of influencing parliamentary decision-making with
their financial support, propaganda exploitation, bribery,
blackmail, extortion, forged documents, false promises and
rumors. Their departmental mission is to co-opt as many of the
people with whom they come into contact as possible. The idea is
to build the widest possible network of either out-and-out
espionage agents, which is the more difficult to attain, or
agents of influence, to be utilized whenever the Soviet
leadership needs to exert pressure on the US government.
It is easier for them to accomplish the latter, as people
involved in the causes thus infiltrated tend to accept at face
value that they are being supported by legitimate research
groups, scholarly associations, etc., when in fact all such
representation, including trade delegations, medical groups, all
are KGB controlled. By the time an individual is approached to do
something he seriously questions, his case officer simply shows
him how much he has already done, threatening to expose him.
Its been done. Many times that we know of. Defector debrief
indicates a substantial increase in these activities in the last
10 years.
J. MILLER
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 85 18:44:40 EDT
From: Herb Lin <LIN@MIT-MC>
For the message to which I am responding, I thank you; I learned
something factual from it.
When I said the disinformation and Active Measures campaign
conducted by the KGB to influence the freeze movement (as well as
other groups) was an intelligence campaign, I meant just that.
Although the propaganda organs are routinely involved in support
of such efforts...
I accept your correction. Indeed, I am aware that Soviet
disinformation is only one part of a coordinated campaign; any
intelligence service (including our own) would do such things; they
may be better than others at it, but that point is debatable.
Again, let me try to communicate the harm done when any
group is thus penetrated...
Their departmental mission is to co-opt as many of the
people with whom they come into contact as possible. The idea is
to build the widest possible network of either out-and-out
espionage agents, which is the more difficult to attain, or
agents of influence, to be utilized whenever the Soviet
leadership needs to exert pressure on the US government.
I don't know what you mean by "agent of influence." Is a Congressman
that votes against MX a KGB agent of influence?
It is easier for them to accomplish the latter, as people
involved in the causes thus infiltrated tend to accept at face
value that they are being supported by legitimate research
groups, scholarly associations, etc., when in fact all such
representation, including trade delegations, medical groups, all
are KGB controlled. By the time an individual is approached to do
something he seriously questions, his case officer simply shows
him how much he has already done, threatening to expose him.
If you can do so without violating classification, could you please
construct a hypothetical scenario by which Soviet support (financial
or otherwise) of an anti-MX group and separately a Find Missing
Children group could/would reasonably lead to getting notions harmful
to US national security that would not be gotten otherwise. Please
tell us what is wrong with such arrangements. How would exposure in
these situations be harmful??? For a person working on the MX, sure;
they could buy him out, seduce him, etc. But for the demonstrators on
the street protesting MX or supporting the freeze? Why does it matter
where the support comes from?
Its been done. Many times that we know of. Defector debrief
indicates a substantial increase in these activities in the last
10 years.
Compromise of specific individuals in a position of power or
knowledge? I believe it. How does this affect Soviet support of the
freeze?
herb lin
------------------------------
Date: 2 May 1985 9:53:07 EDT (Thursday)
From: Jeff Miller AMSTE-TOI 4675 <jmiller@apg-1>
Subject: KGB and Influence
Agent of Influence is one of those intel phrases that
alternates from being conveyed through Hollywood as meaning
someone of incredibly diabolical proportions to meaning very
little, when encountered by the public.
An Agent of Influence is almost always a national of the
target country, always situated in a position to have some impact
on government decision making or public opinion. He is usually
"developed" over a lengthy term, depending on the requirements of
the Soviet government. ( Although the Soviets are the most
accomplished in what they term; "Active Measures", when they put
a rush on... usually due to bureaucratic impatience... their
operations turn into the most spectacular shambles... they really
don't excel in worst case planning! ) By development I mean he is
directly contacted, usually by an operative with impeccable
linguistic and intellectual abilities, and eventually recruited.
It must be understood that during development, the subject is not
aware he is dealing with KGB. In most cases the operative either
passes himself off as a private Soviet citizen with counterpart
views, goals, beliefs, etc., or as a third country national. ( I
am saddened at what I believe to be a much lower intellectual and
linguistic ability across our intel community. The reason we
seldom try to put people in the USSR, with good paper, precise
idiomatic language capability, AND the ability to pass themselves
off as doctors or scientists, we don't have them! ) Ideally the
subject will never know he has been aiding KGB. Often, however,
due to insecurity, the operative will reveal himself and threaten
the subject with exposure to the host country security services,
warning the subject that his previous activities constitute grave
violations of the law.
Often the Soviets try to combine the roles of Agents of
Influence with espionage. This has brought them some successes
that we know of, but also some disasters, since many people who
would allow themselves to be blackmailed into influence draw the
line at selling secrets. Classic cinematic tactics, such as the
use of sexual ( hetero- and homo- ) entrapment, do occur, albeit
far less exotic and glamorous.
I am curious about your questions about the KGB and finding
missing kids. Are you aware of something I'm not?
I am not saying the Soviets are the earthly manifestation of
evil - in fact, I'm saying we need to follow their lead in terms
of unblinkered realpolitik. They are quite capable of
humanitarian actions, largely on a personal basis, and
occasionally on a national basis, as several times they have
availed the US of distress signals in the ocean as picked up by
their SIGINT satellites.
It must be realized that actions by the KGB and other
external organs of the Soviet government are not spontaneous,
idealistic, or altruistic. When they use operatives to penetrate
a movement, they are not doing the movement any favors, they are
using it to gather intelligence or spread disinformation. If a
movement is of no political or strategic use for Soviet
policy, it won't be used. 90% of the organizations the John Birch
Society screams about would never even receive consideration for
penetration. Perhaps a Soviet ambassador or consular officer may
pose for photos with Bob Hope or Pete Rose, but that isn't
because they've decided to subvert comedy or baseball.
Point is this: It is not relevant to say "what's wrong if
the Sov's pour money and support into (--- fill in the blank with
any undeniably worthy cause---) if its a worthy cause?" because
unless that cause can be worked to the Soviet's advantage, they
won't use it.
Useable, subvertable causes get Soviet rubles.
Unuseable but nice causes get fat smiling diplomats.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 May 85 12:13:39 edt
From: lasspvax!vax135!cornell!kevin@Berkeley (Kevin Saunders)
>From: Jeff Miller AMSTE-TOI 4675 <jmiller@apg-1.ARPA>
>Subject: Peace With Honor
>
>By use of the incredible
>opportunities afforded KGB operatives and agents of influence in the US, the
>Soviets prevented the deployment of the Enhanced Radiation Warhead - and
>realized that they possessed the ability to influence Western public opinion
>and bring about destructive results.
Before engaging your flamethrower again, please look into statements
by Sam Cohen in his book on the weapon he invented--the neutron
warhead. In it Cohen describes his unsuccessful 20-year effort to get
the United States *military* to accept the neutron bomb. He
criticizes the ERW for being a dirty compromise weapon rather than a
pure-fusion device; criticizes the USArmy for its "let's make the
rubble bounce" attitude, and lack of interest in a weapon which has
the potential to give the *defense* the advantage--on its home
ground!--and lead to a much-to-be-desired stalemate on the
battlefield; and finally suggests that, inasmuch as Europeans don't
seem interested in accepting measures which would aid in the *defense*
of Europe, we should leave NATO. Please explain . . . is Mr.
Cohen an "agent of influence?" (After all, he's in favor of
"weakening the alliance"-- sounds like an "objective enemy" to me!)
Is the Army a dupe of the Kremlin?
***Dear moderator: optional flames start here.***
>The successes of that campaign have led to the nuclear freeze movement
>of today. Counterintelligence has determined a tremendous effort is
>being made by the KGB, [which] has spent a half century perfecting the
>arts of propaganda and disinformation, which has unlimited resources
>and no compunction about committing them,
Post hoc ergo propter hoc, eh, Mr. Miller? There are those of us
who believe that MX, SDI, and other megaboondoggles are bad for long-term
US security, and that their immediate (and most devastating)
consequence is the crippling of free enterprise. Somehow expanding
the most highly socialized (=> highly corrupt!) sector of our national
economy at the expense of *all other sectors* does not strike me as
a strategy to ensure the *freedom* of Americans. Further, does it not
strike you as odd that we do not charge those countries which presumably
benefit from our global military capability for our "services," but instead
must bribe them (e.g., the Phillippines) to allow us to subsidize their
defense? Isn't this a kind of Defense Socialism, in which the American
taxpayer is the ultimate victim?
Further, does holding beliefs contrary to those held by Ronald Reagan
et al. make
me an enemy of the US people? I believe that the shoe's on the other foot;
those who have been charged with the responsibility for running our
nationalized defense sector, having surrendered their own freedom for
the sake of worthy ideals, often seem to have forgotten what America
stands *for*, and stand willing to accept any perversion of democracy,
particularly institutionalized government lying,
as long as it's bad for "the enemy." The constant whining heard of late
about the drawbacks of having a free press is a major symptom. This
"agents of influence" twaddle is another--if you find somebody
blackmailed by or accepting money/drugs/etc. from the KGB, let's all
hear about it! Let's put 'em on trial & string the guilty high!
Referring to "agents of influence" seems to be a cute new technique
for slandering those with whom you disagree without going through the
trouble (or legal risk) of naming them.
Kevin Eric Saunders
------------------------------
[End of ARMS-D Digest]