Shane. G. O'Hagan: Author Interview Part II

• If not yourself, who would you be?

 

I’d love to be a journalist of some description, but one with some self-respect, not a writer for the Sun or Daily Mail. Louis Theroux would be a fun guy to be, like Jeremy Paxman, as you’d just antagonise people all day. That or an actor on an improvised comedy show or movie, not because I think I’m funny but because they seem to have so much fun in the outtakes. I’d love to be Mark Millar too, because not only does he write comics, but he just throws them together from the most offensive topics he can think off, much like Frankie Boyle.

 

• Where would you like to live?

 

I’ve always wanted to live in a big city, and I’ve pretty much fulfilled that dream being in Edinburgh. A few year ago, I would have chosen a big European city like Berlin or Rome, but I think I’d just like their weather more than anything else.

 

• Your favourite prose authors.

 

Bret Easton Ellis, Irvine Welsh, Iain M. Banks. Their fiction is what inspires me. It inspires me because it’s so inspired. They say that Asimov and Clark revolutionised Sci-Fi, but Ellis, Welsh and Banks revolutionised the written word. Hunter S. Thompson should be there too, but he’s more of a poet.

 

• Your favourite poets.

 

Hunter S. Thompson, Jack Kerouac, Shakespeare. Shakespeare is an obvious choice but that’s because he’s amazing. It’s like saying that Cadbury’s is the world’s most popular chocolate. It is for a reason. Allen Ginsberg is good, too, but he supports NAMBLA so there’s some respect lost as a human, but not a poet. Philip Larkin. Roald Dahl. There’s something about simple over-elaborate yet beautifully written prose being poetic.

 

• Your favourite painters and composers.

 

A popular choice – Da Vinci, but not for the Mona Lisa or any of those things, but for his notebooks. We throw around the word “genius” these days and attach it to people like Kanye West, but they don’t deserve it at all. Da Vinci was a genius. Beethoven was a genius. Mozart, Tchaikovsky, Chopin, they’re geniuses. Modern composers like Michael Kamen and Nobuo Uematsu deserve a mention as well as Jeremy Soule. John Williams, too.

 

• Your favourite heroes in real life.

 

Steve Buscemi. After 9/11, he volunteered to his old firefighting squad to help clean up. He did it anonymously, though how anyone could miss his face is beyond me. David Attenborough for spreading knowledge. All teachers (that do a good job). People like JK Rowling and Stephanie Meyer, not because they write well, but because their fiction (however good or bad it might be) gets people to read. Say what you want about Katie Price, but she gets people to buy books who probably haven’t read anything outside of the Daily Star in years.

 

• Your favourite heroes in fiction.

 

Jack Bauer. He took down a helicopter with a handgun and came back from the dead thrice. John McClane. Ned Stark. Tony Stark. There’s a brilliant bit in The Ultimates, where Iron Man is thrown into Grand Central Station by The Hulk. At this point, he’s dying of a brain tumour and gets drunk to numb the pain. His tech team find him, and he’s a mess. He’s thrown up inside his helmet, he’s in a cold sweat and he tells them to pull the plug on the mission, because he can’t do it, he’s too scared. This little kid comes up and says, “But Iron Man, if you don’t save New York, who will?” He gives the kid the thumbs up and flies off for Round Two. What a guy.

 

• Your favourite names.

 

I love Jack and will be on for any character in a movie or book with that name, no questions asked.

 

• Your pet aversion.

 

I’m not averse to any pets, but I can’t have disrespect. Costs nothing to be polite.

 

• What characters in history do you most dislike?

 

The generals in the Confederate army during the American War for Independence. There’s a big deal about the politics behind their politics, and the slaves they’re fighting for the right to keep had a very important place in the economy. The emancipation of those slaves would cause unknown problems in terms of labour and how money changed hands. They were still racists, though, and greedy, much like the modern Republicans. Even before that, the colonists slaughtered Native Americans left and right. Humans are the worst.

 

• What is your present state of mind?

 

Happy, happiest I’ve been in a while.

 

• For what fault have you most toleration?

 

Stupidity, just because I like correcting people.

 

• Your favourite motto.

 

My family motto is “Victory or Death”, and although it’s badass, I don’t really subscribe to it. My favourites are either the scouts (Be Prepared), Google (Don’t be evil) or Pokemon (Catch ‘em all).

Shane. G. O'Hagan: Author Interview Part I

JQ: First of all Shane thank you for agreeing to this interview. You've recently published your debut novel "My Thoughts Bore Me" which in itself is no mean feat but before we get down to brass tax perhaps we'd like to get to know you a little better...
 

• What is your favourite virtue?

S.G.O'H: Virtues are generally just self-control against some hedonistic pleasure, so I’d have to choose something like a good temper. Not temperance, however, which is just plain silly.

• What are your favourite qualities in man?

S.G.O'H: Our compassion. Rarely has it been exhibited outside of self-preservation within other species. The ability for one human to look at another and understand their situation is amazing, never mind their purposeful decision to do something about it.

• What is your favourite occupation?

S.G.O'H: Teacher, obviously. Advancing the human race one child at a time. That and the holidays.

• What is your chief characteristic?

S.G.O'H: Friendliness and good nature, especially towards strangers. You might be the first person that day to smile at them.

• What is your idea of happiness?

S.G.O'H: Every day I wake up early and realise that I have a full day ahead of me, by my own rules.

• What is your idea of misery?

S.G.O'H: Not trying, just accepting failure. I’m guilty of this with regards to sports because I’m afraid of embarrassing myself.

• What is your favourite colour and flower?

S.G.O'H: My favourite colour is green because some guy once got me into a band called Green Day...My favourite flower is lavender because it smells amazing. I used to have a lavender plant in my front garden and I remember pulling entire stems off to give to girls when I was six. I was such a player back then.

Part II coming soon... 

In the meantime "My Thoughts Bore Me" is available in both Kindle and paperback format from 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/My-Thoughts-Bore-Me-ebook/dp/B008LFI63E

An Exploration of Time and Space: World War I 1945 - 1939

Now I'm not one for believing in doomsday theories or Armageddon conspiracies but as I fell into a slumber, no more than two nights past, I had a realisation of sorts as I lay in bed. I realise that many a man will have had such epiphanies and the majority can be discounted immediately, but I compel you to continue and give me just a little of your time to consider what I have to say. I propose that time is, in fact, moving backwards as we know it.

Consider this; the main events in our history so far have seen man develop towards an infinite point of technological advancement. Yet our collective behaviour would suggest that we are no more fit to wield such weapons of potential destruction than our simian cousins in London Zoo. If we were to assume that we began with an infinite knowledge of our universe and had in fact chosen to destroy it, whether consciously or subconsciously, then certain things would begin to make much more sense.

Take our love affair with war for instance. We must begin here by understanding that the possibility for nuclear war is redundant as it serves the purpose of no man to eradicate the human race. If we look at the major conflicts of humanity in reverse order we can see a distinct pattern whereby old enemies battle it out for dominance and control of natural resources. Each time a war of great magnitude occurred, although truthfully there can be no other kind; the weaponry at military disposal became significantly reduced in quality. This being the knock on effect of years of blood shed and barbarism. If we believe time to travel under the current definition we see man improving his arsenal and developing his thirst for cruelty. The former proposition would highlight not only a tendency for evolution, but also a more tangible understanding of the effects of war. Par example, the world was almost destroyed between 1945-39 and thus when 'old' quarrels were reignited in 1918 soldiers were forced to prevail with less than adequate weaponry as all sides struggled to come to terms with the devastation of the previous war. If we were to assume that time is indeed following the path we currently accept then surely man would have learned his lesson as far as war and tyranny are concerned? Your humble narrator would like to think so anyway.

My argument as far as war and peace are concerned is brief. Though it is my aim to inspire curiosity not to bore you with triviality and details of little consequence. You may still be asking yourself how can this be and even possibly be searching for loopholes in my theory. The fact is, you are asking  questions. Next time we shall consider Religion and the sense that can be drawn from a paradoxical time shift. Remember, unlike light, time does not travel in straight lines.

Jude 

Greatest 20th Century Spy?

Camden and "Proud".

    I arrived in London on a terribly damp and extremely dank May afternoon, though this did little to quash the overwhelming sense of importance and significance the city throws down like a gauntlet every time I visit. As the clouds threatened to open overhead I took to pastures below the surface and made my way from Victoria to Camden Town. I made my journey in search of a converted stable known as "Proud". Enigmatic as they come, the website danced circles around the actual location and were it not for an inside tip on a large steel horse I may still be struggling through the hustle and bustle that is naturally draped across Camden Market during the infamous bank holiday weekend "crawl".

    As I entered the venue I was immediately taken aback by the intimacy of the main room and its subtle juxtaposition to the outer area that consisted of stables converted to seating booths with high definition television screens and the seemingly obligatory fus-ball table. Only for a few well placed white and purple spotlights the main room was shrouded in total darkness. Comfortable sofas were delicately arranged around the room allowing maximum comfort to the most respectful or crowds already assembled. Delayed ever so slightly by the human traffic naturally accumulated on Cup Final Day, I made my way to the bar aware that on stage sat the figures of Ciaran Lavery and Aaron Shanley. The atmosphere generated within such unique confines was startling to say the least and as I struggled in the most Scottish of ways with London prices, I knew, alas, I was in for a special afternoon.

    Since his was the first and most distinctive voice my ears encountered I shall begin the performance of Ciaran Lavery. Having heard Ciaran perform many times centre stage for the ragtime Americana bandits they call Captain Kennedy; I had an idea what to expect from this gig. Well, at least that’s what I thought as I made my way to the big smoke. With ears open I could not believe the haunting undercurrents present in the naturally maturing melodies of this still very young man. The rough gravel of his voice was succinctly complimented by the vulnerability of his character as he put it on show for the whole world to see. A circus of the heart, mind and soul where tickets cost not penny one. The accomplishment with which he teased the guitar into submission surpassed any expectations held by thine own self, for I was of the impression that the focus here was lyrical content as opposed to the musical accompaniment. Both were magnificent and the strumming, plucking, picking patterns on display were inspirational on both a personal and professional level. If the Postman ever got tired of the doldrums, learned to play guitar and shared the stories he had to tell, you can bet they wouldn’t be far off what was to be heard on a rainy night near Soho. Combined with quasi-stories about old train sets, which may have gone slightly over the head of many an English audience member, Ciaran’s set made for a thoroughly enjoyable showpiece. As I watched him on stage I got the impression that each step in this young man’s rise to “fame” had been meticulously planned. Yet I find it impossible to believe that you can choreograph the tenderness and fragility inherent in the substance behind the man. Then again this could all be supposition. Only time will tell.

    Aaron Shanley, to your humble narrator at least, was an unknown entity aside from the fact that he was signed to Public Sector Records alongside some fantastic Northern Irish musicians. My immediate thought, and I may as well get it out of the road now, was that he suffered from the misfortune of having been beaten to the post by Damien Rice as far as his vocal identity was concerned. It must be noted at this point that although they may share a soothing vocal tone and use a capo (and a shiny red on at that), the similarity ends here. Aaron Shanley appeared on first sighting to possess the sincerity and intensity of a man with the weight of the world on his shoulders. Lyrically he did little to quell this notion, yet as if by synaesthesia he was able to lift both his own weight, and the emotional burden of the audience, each time he stepped up to the plate and drew us in with his own brand of melancholia riddled euphoria. His fascinating chord structures and delicate melodies stood out to your humble narrator and as each song progressed I simply wished that it would not end. Very rarely do I actively pursue an artist’s back-catalogue upon first listen, but in this case I will certainly be making an exception.

The posters say the tour would feature Ciaran Lavery versus Aaron Shanley, and even though the judges scorecards were tied by the final bell, the real winners here ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, were in fact, music and the fine people of Camden.

Fancy more from artists of the same ilk? Music Plus Fire

Divorcing Jack

On New Years Eve I took up a challenge to read 12 books that had been sitting on my book case gathering dust for longer, and certainly no less, than a year. When the list was formulated I was in the middle of the "Christmas Bender" shall we say and I didn't really think about my selections very carefully. It might even be worth pointing out that I wasn't within 1,000 miles of my book case at the time. My selections were made by referencing the picture seared onto the back of my eyelids following years of neglect shown towards masterpieces that deserve a much more caring and dedicated owner than your humble narrator. I mixed a cocktail of old, new, edgy and easy titles to give me the best chance of success in the months ahead before getting on the saddle with my first title. In the time since I began the challenge I have finished one book on the list, read "A Clockwork Orange" and am currently reading "American Psycho".
    Needless to say, after 1/3 of 2012, the challenge isn't quite going to plan. I have reverted to type and randomly chosen books that take my fancy while simultaneously throwing the "challenge titles" back on the scrap heap to collect dust and look fancy when people call round. Though they never do.
     In actual fact by January 6th I had finished the first of my 12 challenge books, "Divorcing Jack" by Colin Bateman. It is only through sheer neglect for my NYResolution that I am not more advanced in my quest to conquer some of the greatest novels ever written by man. It stops now. I hereby submit my review. NAY! The first review of twelve that will shine down on you with apostolic glory between now and 2013! 

"Divorcing Jack" - Colin Bateman

    Unlike many of the titles in this challenge, when I lifted "Divorcing Jack" from the shelf it wasn't following a period of long term neglect. Rather it was following a period of self-inflicted abstinence from an author whose work I thoroughly enjoy. In order to savour the feeling I made a decision early on to take time between his published works so as to prevent the inevitable withdrawal symptoms that would surely come when I had read more material that was physically available.
    My first encounter with Mr Bateman was several years ago when I was gifted a more recent release entitled “Belfast Confidential”. It embodied many of the same qualities present in “Divorcing Jack”, though if you ask a good friend of mine he will tell you the former lacks the quality of the latter. All the same we are not here for a comparative study; you want to know what the book was like.
     The story has a simple premise. A typical Northern Irishman finds himself in hot water as a result of moonlighting for the local government while working as a journalist. A series of ridiculous yet believable events ensue as our narrator guides us through the Northern Ireland of the late 90s. The leader of the local assembly, ex-IRA members turned gangsters, Loyalist Paramilitaries, a stand up comedian, a nun and even the narrator's wife fall under his suspicions as he tries to find a tape that will help solve the murder of his, albeit fleeting, bit on the side. The results are a mixture of hilarity and suspense that leaves the reader yearning for more. There are many works of literature which deserve time and patience, yet with “Divorcing Jack” neither is necessary as the reader is immediately captivated by this well paced thriller. Each chapter leaves the reader desperate to find out what will happen next. As you probably know, there are very few books which do this well.
    Technical proficiency aside, what I enjoy most about Bateman’s work is that it’s from home and by a published author ready to move past “The Troubles” and have a look at Northern Ireland as we stand. It may not be my viewpoint, the main character is in fact politically juxtaposed to me, but it is a viewpoint all the same. A witty, captivating and scarily accurate depiction of a state that is struggling to come to terms with it’s ever changing identity. The more I read Bateman, the more I like him. I was skeptical at first and wary of his sense of humor, as it often poked fun at people or groups I related to. Yet as anyone who reads his work will find, no-one is safe from the fun poking and stereotypical Irish craic that Bateman so eloquently puts on paper on a regular basis.

Final verdict 8/10: More of the same please Colin!

The Greatest 20th Century Spy

The first and chief rule of espionage is trust no one. Everyone has their own agenda and if you give someone the benefit of the doubt then they will almost certainly make you regret that decision. Away from the field this rule visibly translates into what people say and write. Nothing can be taken for granted and you most certainly cannot believe anything you read. The greatest example highlighting this necessity for care does not come from Russia, but rather was provided by the now infamous James Jesus Angleton. Jim Angleton was a forerunner in the CIA, and it's anti-Soviet department, right up until the 1960s. However, ruthless as he may have been in his later years, Maclean and Philby were able to work in his patch with little risk of capture. As a result Angleton spent the rest of his life dedicated to the scrupulous identification and capture of Soviet spies on American soil. When speaking after the 1963 defection, Angleton is said to have made self-serving remarks about the day Philby received his CBE. Claiming to have spoken to Philby, he reported that the spy had explained “…what this country needs is good dose of socialism…”[1] This piece of conversation was used by Angleton to highlight that he had been aware of Philby’s true nature long before his defection. If he had been successful then it would serve to show that Angleton did indeed have a nose for a traitor and that he had not been made to look ridiculous by the Cambridge spies. Unfortunately for Angleton, Philby had not been at the ceremony. In actual fact records show, like many other recipients, Philby was sent his CBE in the post because of the large numbers given out after the war. This was unfortunate for Angleton and highlights the point that everything that is written or said in the world of espionage must be proven before it can be believed.

Foreign Service officer S. J. Hamrick is an individual who has clearly embraced the importance of reliable and indisputable evidence in the work of the modern historian. “Deceiving the Deceivers” was written with the intention of looking at the story of the Cambridge spies from a new and very different angle. He based his thesis on the 1996 release of the Venona intercepts, 1942-1945. Over the course of 34 years the Americans and British worked together to decode thousands of Soviet messages sent between Moscow, London, and Washington. Within these messages there lay clues to the identity of a Soviet spy working in the American Foreign Office. We now know this agent was Donald Maclean but as Philby highlighted, until late 1950 there was “…still no basis for supposition…”[2] on where the leak was coming from.

According to official records the CIA ciphers at Arlington Hall did not make the link between the code name Homer and Maclean until just before his May 1951 flight with Guy Burgess. The accepted version of the story claims “…Kim set his escape plan in motion…”[3] used inside information to get notice to Maclean, and gave him the opportunity to escape from London before his imminent capture and arrest. This version of events has been told in almost every book relating to Philby written in the last 45 years. However, in his recent publication, it is the self designated duty of Hamrick to convince the reader that Maclean, Burgess, and Philby were in fact pawns in a much bigger CIA/SIS ploy. He claims that, rather than holding the key to a swift and timely exit, Philby’s “…career was on its last legs…”[4] and that the real deception had been on the part of the CIA and SIS. Hamrick has set his book out in a very formal manner and its appearance mirrors the transcripts on which much of the content rests. This is very much in keeping with his mechanical attempt to use concrete facts and figures to demythologise and rewrite the greatest spy case in history.

Hamrick’s argument relies on the assumption that “…M15 had identified Donald Maclean as a Soviet agent long before May 25, 1951…”[5] In reaction to this discovery, rather than arrest him immediately, the British and American agencies chose to use it to their advantage and root out further Soviet spies in their midst. Thus rather than being the saviour of Donald Maclean, Philby was instead a vehicle for disinformation intended to “…provoke the Soviet embassy into action…”[6] Hamrick goes a long way to highlight evidence of the British use of deception and double cross tactics throughout their military history but finds it very hard to back up his claims with anything more than circumstantial evidence.

Throughout the book Hamrick appears to pay particular attention to the activities of Philby in his Washington career. It is his intention to show that he was the main source of disinformation and that he was not as effectual as a Soviet spy as either he or his legend would have you believe. Throughout his publication there are many assertions from the author of the weakness of Kim Philby. “KGB files released in the 1990s indicate that Philby’s espionage output during the war years didn’t compare to that of this fellow Cambridge spies…”[7] and “…they might have concluded that Philby had given Moscow very little from 1947 until 1963.”[8] These are just two examples of the harsh attitude Hamrick adopts towards Philby and his legacy. It is in the wording of these claims however that we can see the chink in this white knight’s armour. The use of the phrases ‘might have’ and ‘indicated’ are all too common in this interpretation of the Philby story. They prove the existence of theories throughout the book and highlight the lack of fact or proven actualities. Rather than providing an improved and revised version of this complex time in modern history, ‘Deceiving the Deceivers’ continues to add to the ‘what if’ section of the espionage library, giving little concrete evidence while trying to convince you he has.

This, however, need not be the case. For although the Philby story appears to be protected by a hall of mirrors, the coldest of Soviet shoulders, and a Britain reluctant to share the secrets of the infamous spy, it is possible to prove that Harold Adrian Russell Philby was indeed the greatest and most effective spy of the 20^th Century. Beyond the traps and tricks that surround the Philby story, proof of his effectiveness throughout his ten year career at the top of SIS is available to those who want and know where to find it.

Firstly, the NKVD deployed Philby with various goals, and his aims and instructions differed as much as his MI6 title did. Obviously his missions would not end with the last minute destruction of a WMD or the defeat of a notorious villain; after all he was not James Bond. Instead we must look at Kim Philby’s career in terms of his contribution to the defence of the Soviet Union. When speaking in his only lecture to the KGB he explained that during his 1934 recruitment “…it seemed obvious to me that, for any true Communist…defence of the Soviet Union was the first priority…”[9] During his illustrious career Kim was head of the Iberian section when Spain and Portugal were important battle grounds for German, British and Russian spies, he was head of the anti-Soviet department of SIS for several years, and he was British liaison officer with the CIA and FBI in Washington. As a result he was constantly privy to information that would always be of interest to the KGB and allowed them to stay one step ahead of their superpower rivals. 

The ability of Philby to single-handedly protect the USSR was most evident when he was stationed in the United States of America. As liaison officer with the American intelligence services, his job was to represent Britain in the build up to any cross Atlantic operations. It would prove to be the peak of his service career; he had significant exposure to valuable information, and could exert a considerable amount of influence over decisions made by the CIA. It was thus not surprising that his two years in Washington led to a remarkable lack of success “…with the number of covert operation mounted in the late 1940s and early 1950s…”[10] Philby had passed every ounce of information back to his control officer through courier Guy Burgess. However, the USSR could only act on his messages once they had covered his tracks by duplicating it from other sources. These efforts were successful and the result was the eventual capture and, more often than not, execution of every Western force sent across the Iron Curtain. Astonishingly though, it would be 1967 before the “…betrayal is laid to Philby…”[11] and a further year before this would be confirmed in his autobiography. The actions Philby would have taken when dealing with possible infiltration are best highlighted in his treatment of “…one of the most extraordinary secrets of the cold war…”[12]

In what was known as the ‘Albanian Operation’, the allied intelligence services wanted to use rebel forces to provoke civil war in one of Russia’s satellite countries. They hoped that if the rebellion was successful then it would weaken the Soviet Union via a domino effect similar to the one that would appear later in South-East Asia. After much deliberation they chose Albania because it was the “…smallest and weakest of the socialist states…”[13] Marshal Tito had broken from the USSR in neighbouring Yugoslavia and reconstruction plans were struggling under the Communist government. With Kim Philby and James McCagar as joint commanders the allies set off to rearrange the face of Eastern Europe. When the Albanian émigrés left from their Maltese base they had no idea that they would be victims of one the most notorious betrayals of the Cold War. Newspapers claimed that of the 300 men sent in by SIS and the CIA 150 were either killed on landing or jailed and executed. The remaining 150 “…struggled back to Greece…”[14] The Albanian forces had been waiting for the arrival of the rebels and were dealt with swiftly. Obviously Philby could not be the only reason for this debacle; after all he was back in London and in exile of his own for the last two years of planning. He did however clearly “…betray the existence of an Albanian operation to the Russians.”[15] This was enough for the Albanians to infiltrate the rebels and lead them to their slaughter. Throughout Philby’s time in America there were similar attempts in satellites such as Latvia and Estonia, Poland, Armenia, and the Ukraine. As expected each of these covert operations resulted in similar levels of failure, much to the bemusement of the CIA and MI6.

Throughout the Cold War one of the biggest and most constant threats to the superpowers was the defection of agents to the other side. Paranoia and anxiety were prevalent in both Russia and the United States just from considering the possibility of a defection. They had every right to be worried. There were innumerable defections throughout the span of the Cold War and with each one there went the possibility of vital information being transferred to the enemy. For Kim Philby his experiences and run-ins with aspirant defectors presented the need for him to defend not only Soviet Union but his true identity as well.

In September 1945 First Secretary of the Soviet embassy in Istanbul, Konstantin Volkov, approached the British embassy to propose a defection deal. As it turned out Mr Volkov was employed by the NKVD and had been preparing for his defection for quite some time. In return for safe passage to Cyprus with his wife and £27,500 he offered a doorway to Russia’s secret service at home and abroad. In return for his requests Volkov promised “…data on three Soviet agents…one in the administration of the British counter-intelligence…”[16] and “…addresses of NKVD buildings in Moscow, the burglar alarm systems, key impressions, guard schedules, and a list of all agents in the Middle East…”[17] For Philby and Russia this was a dangerous proposition. The success of Volkov to defect would have meant the outing of three of the Soviet Union’s most important spies and the possible ransacking and bugging of their headquarters in Moscow. For MI6 it was a fantastic proposition, they had the opportunity to embrace the upper hand over the NKVD and potentially keep it forever. Naturally “C” immediately “…decided to give this delicate matter to one of its most talented administrators…”[18] As fate would have it that talented agent was Kim Philby. This was the first of several strokes of luck that would shape the course of the ‘Volkov Affair’ and give Kim hope that it could be resolved in his favour. His luck proved to hold but a satisfactory resolution could not have been found without substantial skill on the part of our Masterspy.

Upon his approach the embassy in Istanbul told Volkov that he would have to ask London for assistance. He knew that some British ciphers had been broken and so insisted that his request be posted in a secure diplomatic bag. When the bag arrived on Philby’s desk a week had passed. Thinking on his feet, Kim proposed that MI6 take the offer seriously and that he should go straight to Turkey and deal with it. This would allow him to remain in control for the entirety of the proceedings and dispel any suggestions that he may be culpable for the failure of the transaction. Unfortunately for Kim, Sir Stewart Menzies had another agent in mind for the cross continent journey. However, suffering from a fear of flying, Brigadier Douglas Roberts explained that he would have to reject the offer as he only travelled long distances by boat. Lady luck had shone on the double agent once more. Philby now had a window to contact his control officer and get the news to the NKVD. By the time he began his flight to Istanbul via Cairo three more days had already passed. By the time he arrived in Istanbul, via an unexpected stop in Tunis and having stalled and perverted the cause of justice as much as possible, three weeks had passed. Accounts vary on why he was chosen for the assignment and the details of his behaviour preceding his arrival in Turkey, but this is inconsequential. No matter how events are dressed up the essential facts remain the same. Volkov had disappeared by the time Philby tried to contact him in Istanbul and some time later “…at Lubyanka Volkov confessed and was shot…”[19] What is important is that one KGB file indicates Philby “…quickly informed his Soviet control officer in London…”[20] Without Philby’s quick thinking and well developed plan he would surely have been revealed and the security of the NKVD would have been under immediate threat.

The ‘Volkov Affair’ is only one of the many highlighted cases of defectors who threatened his position in MI6. Years earlier Walter Krivitsky and Igor Gouzenko had posed individual but equally as serious threats to his career and the Russian secret service. Nonetheless, the events of August and September 1945 highlight the ability of Philby to grab victory from the jaws of defeat. His impeccable skill and talent for the role of double agent served him well for the entirety of his career. Even when he was exiled to Beirut MI6 remained cautious of him and his motives for not immediately fleeing to Russia. That being said, even though he housed the ability to deal with threats using impeccable foresight and skill, this didn’t prevent him being unable to“…ever feel safe again until 1963 when he was home in Moscow…”[21] How ironic that it would be his friendship and incriminating link to the paranoid and bungling Guy Burgess that would seal his premature decline in MI6.

Throughout his career he was able to see off any challenges to his position and extract the maximum amount of information from his British employers to give to his Russian masters. When he first went to America he apparently wanted to impress Bedell Smith by memorising a 20 plus page document for his scrutiny and comment. Bedell Smith read it once and then had an extensive discussion with Philby referring to individual numbered paragraphs. What Philby didn’t tell anyone was that the document “…was a detailed account of how SIS and CIA would cooperate in the event of war with the Soviet Union…”[22] Moments like these contribute to the clear evidence that shows Harold Adrian Russell Philby to be the greatest spy ever to grace the twentieth century. As has been shown, his skill and finesse were to the advantage of the NKVD and KGB from the very beginning of his career in the early 1930s. The value of his information from three highly important positions in MI6 cannot be brought into question and it is only a matter of time before the documents held by the Official Secrets Act quell any alternative suggestions.   

---

[1] John Ranelagh, The Agency, 1986, P.127

[4] S.J. Hamrick, Deceiving the Deceivers, 2004, P.5

[9] Rufina Philby, The Private Life of Kim Philby: Unpublished Memoirs, 1999, P.248

[10] Phillip Knightley, KGB Masterspy, 1988, P.158

[14] New York Times, October 1967

[15] Phillip Knightley, KGB Masterspy, 1988, P.161

[16] Genrikh Borovik, The Philby Files, 1994, P.238

A Great Double Agent?

By the time Donald Maclean and Guy Burgess took flight to Moscow in May 1951 Kim Philby had already made a rapid ascent up “…the service staircase…” In only eleven years as an employee of His Majesty’s Secret Service, Philby had risen from the lower echelons of Section D under “…Colonel Lawrence Grand…” to the respected pedestal of MI6’s Liaison Officer in America with the CIA and FBI. Guy Burgess, personal problems aside, had been in the service much longer and did not show any signs of making such strides to prominence in the world’s premier secret service. To his American counterparts it must have appeared odd that a man so much younger than his British peers, and who had spent a relatively short time in the defence sector, could rise to the upper tiers so quickly. To those who knew Philby though it was no surprise. As “…one of the few wartime recruits asked to stay on in SIS…” he clearly possessed the qualities necessary for a life of espionage and a career in MI6. Unfortunately for his British employers, these skills were especially suited to best serve the work he had been assigned by his Russian masters.

It is well documented that Philby was not the brightest or most intellectual of his peers at either Cambridge or Caxton Street±. At Cambridge he had been “…altogether unremarkable…" However, in the world of the mid-twentieth century spy intellect only mattered when applied for maximum benefit. If intelligence had been the key to success in intelligence then the brilliantly academic Burgess, who was “…at once the most witty, most beautiful, most clever undergraduate to come to Cambridge since Lord Byron…” could possibly be the source of widespread interest that Philby is today. The fact is that Kim set himself apart from his peers, not with flamboyancy, but through hard work and modest application of the most natural of talents.

Like the characters of Le Carre and Fleming novels, Kim Philby possessed an ability to think quickly and act coolly under pressure. He frequently exhibited these qualities throughout his career, and may not have lived to see the inside of Whitehall had he not been able to call on them when necessary. When Kim was working in the south of Spain in 1937 he was presented with an opportunity to prove his pedigree. Upon deciding to attend a bull fight in Cordoba he was informed by the Capitania in Seville that a pass for travel would not be required. Somewhere along the line signals became confused as the Capitania in Cordoba sent two armed guards to summon the sleeping reporter from his hotel room. At this time his instructions were regularly printed on a substance similar to rice paper, which he kept in his trouser ticket pocket. Needless to say if Franco’s forces were to find this incriminating material the consequences for his career and possibly his mortality would have been disastrous. As the Capitania interrogated Philby about his presence in Cordoba and the guards searched his luggage he found “…brain was beginning to work and he began to see possibilities…"  Any man who failed to act in this situation would be spared judgement for freezing in such intimidating circumstances. For his career it was a pivotal moment and Philby acted on the Sergeants orders for him to empty his pockets. As he recalled in his autobiography, he took his wallet and threw it onto the table “…giving it at the last moment a flick of the wrist…As he had hoped all three men made a dive at it…I scooped the scrap of paper out of my trousers, a crunch and a swallow, and it was gone."

The ability to look down the barrel of a gun, think quickly, then react, served Philby well throughout his career and allowed him to continue working long past his sell by date. Had he not been able to then the unexpected flight of Burgess in 1951 and the interrogations that followed may have panned out very differently indeed.

This ability, however, was not isolated and Philby was well served by the capacity to view his work and actions from many different perspectives. He possessed an almost panoramic view of his world, and as a double agent dealing in counter intelligence it was paramount that he could do so. When faced with an investigation into his “extra-curricular” activities, Philby was backed into a corner by the pressure of soon infamous spy catcher, James Jesus Angleton, and the reluctance of the British to argue with their growing American counterparts. By all rights June 1951 should have signalled the end of Philby’s career. Donald Maclean by now was in poor mental form from the toll of his double life. It is well documented that “…he had grown weary of the underground struggle and was uncertain whether the ideology still rang true enough …"  He evidently craved an escape from his self imposed mental torture. If it had been Maclean summonsed back to England on the 11^th of June it is not hard to conceive that he would have sung any tune the secret service asked of him.

Philby, however, displayed a much greater dedication to his chosen cause and a tough mental exterior. Backed into a corner, Philby used his panoramic mind’s eye to transform the situation into a chess game. From the off he seized the upper hand with a few words to Sir Stewart Menzies: “…I’m no good to you now and never will be again…I’ll put in my resignation…" The first round was Philby’s because he had not been sacked he had resigned. If all went well his service career would not be entirely over, and he had portrayed himself as the self-deprecating servant who put the service ahead of himself. These were shrewd tactics from the supposed victim of M16 scrutiny. Philby had honed this ability throughout his career and had given himself the best opportunity to come out of the episode unscathed. Using his knowledge of counterespionage he scientifically dissected each piece of evidence that Helenus Milmo threw at him and created his own theses on the escape of Burgess and Maclean. The evidence gathered gave no need for a third man as Maclean would have noticed “…top secret papers being withheld from him…" and come to his own conclusion. Philby could see this and made every effort to show that he was still as dedicated to finding the truth as his interrogators.

The ability to act calmly and precisely, to have all eventualities covered, and to use impeccable foresight are not uncommon personality traits. Many businessmen and leaders have relied on such skills to become successful throughout history. What was unusual was the situation. Philby gave a decade of dedicated service to a hidden master right under the nose of the grand old man of the intelligence world, and played by his own rules. He made the most of the talents he had and applied them with a dogged work ethic.  Shakespeare told us not to fear greatness, that “Some men are born into greatness and others have greatness thrust upon them" In relation to Philby both of these statements hold great truth. The path his life took thrust him into a position of great importance in twentieth century history, but had he not been born with the necessary traits to achieve excellence then his life may have been as obscure as the next man’s.

Kim Philby, Traitor?

To many onlookers Kim Philby appears the very definition of a traitor. He is often portrayed as a man who spent his life dedicated to the “betrayal of his sovereign and country…” to the advantage of his adopted Russian masters. He chose an unappreciated life of self-sacrifice that resulted only in hurt for those he encountered both personally and professionally. He committed the ultimate sin and survives in immortality as a result of Cold War one-upmanship. His destiny it seems was to join a long list of Englishmen punishable for treason against a country they felt no affinity for. It is no secret that since 1963 the British Establishment has hoped this would be reason enough for the survival of the legend that intrigues so many around the world. Unfortunately for M16 and the CIA no such Utopia exists, and in the current period of relative goodwill between east and western powers the explanation for interest in Philby lies in the controversy that surrounds his actions over half a century ago. There is no one accepted interpretation of the Philby saga. Both his effectiveness as a soviet spy and the justification of his actions are frequently debated to this day.

It is evident that no conclusion on the life of Kim Philby can be drawn without an evaluation of treason. It was Philby’s sin of commission, and it is a crime that defines many aspects of human nature. For centuries it was regarded as the crime of crimes, easily out-ranking murder, rape, or paedophilia. Punishable by death until 1998, only the desperate, greedy, and deeply committed could conceivably have had aspirations of treason. In Dante’s ‘Divine Comedy’ the ninth, and most horrific, circle of hell is reserved for those found guilty of treason in the mortal world. Each group of traitors is encased in ice to a different depth, ranging from only the waist down to complete immersion. Those who have been found guilty of treason against their country find themselves immersed to the top of the neck, unable to bend or move at all. The fact that only Lucifer suffers more in the inferno, bonded, whipped, and chewing on the bodies of Brutus, Cassius, and Judas, shows the philosophical approach to treason that has spanned the ages. If we follow the common interpretation of Philby’s life we surely must assume that he is destined to join Judas Escariot, Guy Fawkes, and Dafydd ap Gruffydd in the deepest echelons of ‘Dante’s Inferno’.

This interpretation, however, is conceited and single-minded. To call Kim Philby a traitor is not only misguided, but conforms to the modern tradition of hyperbole and exaggeration. It is at a great loss that the last one hundred years has witnessed the gradual dilution of the English language. For centuries the use of the written word was to be admired and revered. Now it only serves to condemn and exacerbate events around the world. In Philby’s case the word traitor has been used with little consideration for its actual meaning or consequences.

Although trivial it must be noted that Harold Adrian Russell Philby was not even born in Europe, let alone the United Kingdom. If the traditional standards are to be applied surely Philby’s loyalty should have lain in India rather than England. At the very least he should have had a choice whether to align himself with India’s British occupiers or those in the struggle for a form of independence. The intention here is not to ignore the unavoidable truth that he was raised and schooled in Britain. On the contrary the intention is to draw contrast with the current political climate in Britain. Are we to consider the proclamations of Abu Uzair and Abu Izadeen treasonous, even though they have been raised in an ideological world completely separate from our own? Through the use of this analysis it is evident that Kim Philby cannot be associated with the term traitor. As Philby himself pointed out, “to betray you have first to belong, I never belonged.”

The nature of the educated man is not to blindly follow, but to examine and evaluate everything he is exposed to. If he did not then authoritarian rule would be easy to uphold and democracy would have no place in the world. The fact that all major developed countries employ some form of democracy highlights the necessity for man to exert his opinion on the world. It is thus unjust for any man to remove Philby’s right “to thought, conscience, and religion…”through the use of the term traitor.

The decisions Philby made are more easily understood when they are put into context by an understanding of where and when he made them. The Europe of the 1930s was a very different place from the one we know today. Countries existed that have since perished, nations were yet to be born, and political unrest was sweeping across an entire continent. The ideals and conflicts that had unintentionally exploded out of Russia in 1917 took hold of everyone, from the minnows to the world powers. The left was rising, inspired by the Bolsheviks, the right was counter-attacking, and anyone in the middle ground found themselves swallowed up by extremism. This is the Europe that Kim Philby unknowingly ventured into during the summer of 1932.

He and his Oxford companion Tim Milne took a tour of Germany, Hungary, and Austria, in search of political enlightenment. Stories of uprising and unrest were not enough. Only first hand experience would suffice for the future spy. Indeed there are many historians who would be jealous of the positioning of Philby during the most historic of times. Shortly after the Reichstag fire in March 1933 Philby is said to have witnessed “uniformed Nazis blocking the entrances to Jewish shops and painting Jude on the doors…” One record claims that Philby is said to have explained to passers-by that such events were unknown in England, only to be told to “clear off”. Already the young impressionable Philby was making life changing decisions, even if he did not realise at the time. It would be inconceivable to expect a young educated mind to witness such timeless events and turn a blind eye. Today the recollection of Nazi Germany evokes emotions such as fear, anger, distress, resentment. What must it have been like for Philby?

Like millions of others Kim found himself looking for an answer to the problem of the right wing in Europe. Like so many of those millions he found solace in Communism. In the summer of 1933 he won a college prize of £14 and spent it “entirely on Marx”. This was a firm indication that Kim had crossed the line from observer to participant. He had chosen a path in life that was neither predetermined nor predictable. It was a path he felt he wanted to travel, a path he could commit to. With hindsight the decision Kim made as a young adult would dominate every aspect of his life until his eventual death in 1988. Looking at the evidence it appears nothing but unjust that he should be referenced as a traitor. Treason is not a crime Kim Philby should be eternally convicted of. Many deaths may have occurred as a result of his decisions and it would be naive to believe that they would not have happened had Philby not been active. Kim Philby made a rational decision based on fact and his interpretation of the changing face of 1930s Europe. For decades he suffered as a result of his decision, but it was his preference not to “become one of those whining ex-communists like Malcolm Muggeridge going around complaining that their ideal had betrayed them.” In the face of alcoholism, depression, and isolation Philby remained loyal to Communism to the end. Such perseverance and dedication is rarely found in ordinary men. This is not treason.