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.