1

Is it Possible to write a credible history of British Intelligence in the 20 th C?

‘I think all my colleagues would agree that it will be in the future quite impossible for

anybody to unravel with any accuracy from the archives the detailed history of

events’

The above quote begins ‘The Official History of the Joint Intelligence Committee

Volume One’ By Michael Goodman. It was written by Lord Greenhill of Harrow a

former Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee.1 The position in the history is

an apt reminder of the pitfalls that would await the author of a history of the

Intelligence community, however, that it also preceded such a history should give an

element of reassurance that the task may just be possible.

To ascertain the possibility, or otherwise, of writing a credible history of British

Intelligence in the 20th century; a full and thorough understanding of what would be

required is needed. Furthermore, the considerable difficulties there would be in

achieving the aim need to be addressed and evaluated.

There are several considerations. It would be necessary to recognise what would be

needed in terms of depth, tactical detail, vs strategic overview and the biography of

key figures. It would be important to consider the relationship to other historical study

and the intended audience, of the study. Furthermore, one must decide on a

definition of credibility for the target audience and how that would affect what might

be considered.

It would also be necessary to consider how, in this sensitive area of study the

chosen time period would affect what was possible both now and how this is or could

be altered for the future. A history of the British Intelligence community would need

1 Goodman, Michael. S. The Official History Of The Joint Intelligence Committee: Volume 1: From The Approach Of The Second World War to the Suez Crisis. (London and New York, 2014). p1.

2

to specify which aspects of the community it intended to document. This document

will examine these areas and the effect they would have on writing a history of British

Intelligence as to its effectiveness and credibility. It will consider the barriers that

would affect credibility such as the chosen author the access to information, and

public opinion and how they might best be overcome where possible.

The work will also consider how the history might be affected by popular fiction.

There have of course been histories of individual aspects of British Intelligence and

of the different agencies and these and the reaction to them will inform and influence

further wide ranging histories. That such a history is yet to be completed and

published for such a large timescale and remit suggests that it has not been possible

to do so yet, but not that it is not now possible, or will never be in the future.

Before considering what would be needed to write a history it is necessary to

examine the subject of what we understand as British Intelligence in this context.

The Journalistic Historian Phillip Knightly rightly asserts that pre 1909 the

Intelligence mechanisms within Great Britain were either military operations

galvanised in times of war, ineffective or non-existent between times, or, private

enterprises run by amateur sleuths2.

In 1909 this was to change with the creation of the Secret Bureau. Knightley refers

to it as “The first Intelligence Agency”. The Secret Bureau differed from what came

before it as Mansfield Smith Cumming (1859–1923)3 and Vernon Kell (1873–1942)4

2 Knightley, Phill ip. The Second Oldest Profession: Spies and Spying in the Twentieth Century. (Revised Edn.)

(London, 2003) p1. 3 Andrew, Christopher. “Cumming, Sir Mansfield George Smith (1859–1923).” Robert Brown Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Ed. H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison. Oxford: OUP, 2004. Online ed. Ed. Lawrence Goldman. Jan. 2012. 27 Oct. 2014 <http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/37331>. 4 Hiley, Nicholas. “Kell, Sir Vernon George Waldegrave (1873–1942).” Nicholas Hiley Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Ed. H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison. Oxford: OUP, 2004. Online ed. Ed. Lawrence Goldman. Jan. 2011. 24 Oct. 2014 <http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/37625>.

3

the two men chosen to run the organisation and their personnel were required to be

removed from the active military ‘lists’. They were therefore civilians rather than

military personnel5 . Whilst their military pensions were expected to supplement their

official wages they were also professionals. Despite this civilian status they were still

under the control of the War Office. This close link between the military and civilian

intelligence mechanism prevails although communication between branches had

peaks and troughs.

The Bureau, despite its remit, was run on a shoestring and had few other resources

that it survived at all is frankly amazing, let alone being successful in its initial

objectives6 .The initial infighting between them, and difficulties Kell and Cumming

had working together, made certain that the two branches separated. This

separation was never healed and although it was agreed at the time it is curious for

organisations whose remits overlap so to be so separate7.

The Oxford English Dictionary simply defines Intelligence as “The obtaining of

information, esp. of military or political value; espionage. Also (esp. in later use): the

agency for obtaining such information; the people employed in such an agency,

secret service”8. Alan Breakspear, however, offers a new definition in his 2013

article: “Intelligence is a corporate capability to forecast change in time to do

something about it. The capability involves foresight and insight, and is intended to

identify impending change, which may be positive, representing opportunity, or

negative, representing threat.”9 Without any desire to gainsay the Oxford English

5 Andrew, Christopher. The Defence of the Realm: The Authorised History of MI5. (London, 2009). p23. 6 Kell, Vernon. “Kell’s Bureau’s six monthly progress reports” KV1/9 National Archives (1909-1914). 7 Andrew. The Defence of the Realm. p25 8 “Intell igence, n.” The Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed. OED Online. Oxford University Press). http://www.oed.com/ Accessed Onl ine 03/12/2014. 9 Breakspear, Alan. “A New Definition of Intell igence”. Intelligence and National Security, 28, (2013) pp678-693

4

Dictionary, this second definition makes the element of an intention to analyse and

use the information more pertinent to the whole.

Knightley’s eloquent differentiation is to the point. “The spy is as old as history, but

intelligence agencies are new. Delilah was a secret agent of the Philistines, but she

did not have to sign the Official Secrets Act or swear not to publish her memoirs

without the director’s approval.” 10

Perhaps this is a key to unlock the definition of who we denote and include as

“British Intelligence”. The BBC Includes the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), the

Secret Service (MI5), the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the

Defence Intelligence Staff (DIS) and the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC)11.

Including forerunners such as the Intelligence Bureau and short lived organisations

such as Special Operations Executive (SOE) would also be necessary. As without

them any history would be incomplete.

Once the subject of the history to be studied is defined, the focus should be on the

history itself. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a ‘history’ as “A written narrative

constituting a continuous chronological record of important or public events … a

history is a work in which each movement, action, or chain of events is dealt with as

a whole and pursued to its natural termination or to a convenient stopping place.”12

This sounds like a straightforward task. In reality, however, this presents the

historian with a huge task.

As was looked at earlier the structure of the Intelligence community in Britain

describes a range of disparate organisations. Highly regarded histories of perhaps

10 Knightley. The Second Oldest Profession. p 1 11 BBC. BBC NEWS http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3460275.stm accessed 27/11/2014. 12 “History, n.” The Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed. OED Online. Oxford University Press). http://www.oed.com/ Accessed Online 03/12/2014.

5

the three most prominent individual organisations are already fairly extended.

Christopher Andrew’s ‘The Defence of the Realm the Authorised History of MI5’ runs

to 1044 pages, Keith Jeffery’s ‘MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service

1909-1949’ 864 pages and Richard Aldrich’s ‘GCHQ’ 634 pages13. Even for an

official historian with large resources the undertaking required to write a

comprehensive history would be massive. Thus the size and complexity of the work

would become an issue in its own right. Journalist and Historian Larry Hannant

discusses Stan Horrall and Carl Betke authors of ‘Canada’s Security Service: An

Historical Outline’ he explains they realised that even in their position as official

historians the task of writing an “exhaustive history would be a multi volume work far

beyond what was then possible for them to complete”; what resulted was an eight

hundred and eleven page outline.14

In his book ‘Kuhn vs. Popper: The Struggle for the Soul of Science’ author, Steve

Fuller discusses the philosophical question of whether writing a history of the recent

past is possible. ‘Kuhn and Foucault had rather different grounds for believing in the

impossibility of contemporary history. Kuhn believed that history requires that the

past be treated as a foreign land, separated in time as if in space.’ Fuller continues:

‘In contrast, Foucault’s doubts about the writing of recent history were based on the

historian's lack of authority in speaking for evidence that is still being used to

legitimise contemporary regimes.’15 This concern is valid, but the status quo is that

histories are written on both recent and ancient past. However, writing the history is

one thing, defining it as credible across the variety of political viewpoints and

13 Jeffrey, Keith. MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service 1909-1949. (London and New York, 2010), Aldrich, Richard. J. GCHQ. (London, 2010) and Andrew. The Defence of the Realm. 14 Hannant, Larry. 1994: Access to the Inside: An Assessment of ‘Canada’s Security Service: A History’. In Wesley, K. Wark(ed.), Espionage: Past, Present, Future. Great Britain: Frank Cass & Co.LTD, pp149-159. 15 Fuller, S. Kuhn vs. Popper: The Struggle for the Soul of Science, (Cambridge, 2003) pp200-201

6

complexity of personal paradigms is another barrier, albeit adding to the richness of

the historical tapestry.

An important aspect of an academic history is that to support anything portrayed as

fact and even opinions of the author should be based on evidence and other

reputable study where possible.

The latter part of the twentieth century, and beginning of the twenty-first century,

have seen a drastic change in what we are allowed to know about British

Intelligence. Gill Bennett, then Senior Editor of the FCO's official post-war

documentary history series, stated at an Intelligence studies conference “security

and intelligence records are still subject to blanket exemption from release.”16 This is

so, however, British Intelligence is now officially avowed. This avowal alongside the

open government initiative of John Major, UK Prime Minister (1990-97),17 and the

Freedom of Information Act of 2000 have given a far greater insight into the

Intelligence Community and its history.18 As Indeed has the passing of time itself.

Sir Stephen Lander then Director General of MI5 stated in 2010 that five part time

staff members were working on clearing the backlog of retained documents that had

potential for release.19 In a time of austerity and terror threats should making sure

historians have access to old paperwork be more of a priority than this? Or does it

16 Bennett, Gill . “Declassification and release policies of the UK's Intell igence Agencies”, Intelligence and

National Security, 17:1, (2002) pp21-32. 17 Debretts, John major. http://www.debretts.com/people-of-today/profile/1781/John-MAJOR. Accessed Online 03/12/2014 18 Legislation.Gov, Freedom of Information Act 2000. (2000)

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/contents accessed online 02/12/2014. 19 Stephen Lander “British intell igence in the twentieth century”, Intelligence and National Security, 17:1, (2002) pp 7-2.

7

look like an easy sidestep for why more has not been released. The SIS website

also uses resource shortages as a reason for the delay in supply of documents.20

Despite this backlog, Information is accruing at such a rate that the National Archive

have a comprehensive guide on how to search for records.21 Even before this

culture of openness appeared, during the time when Andrew believed that “Whitehall

has done what it can to discourage serious study of the making of the British

intelligence community”22, he and David Dilks did not feel that Intelligence Historians

should be put off. Andrew and Dilks wrote “Historians have been far more put off the

subject of intelligence than they need have been … In Britain at the least, the source

material now available, for all its gaps and defects, is sufficient to fill both the general

outline of the missing intelligence dimension and much of its operational material …

Even the censored files in the Public Record Office contain a surprising amount of

both raw intelligence and analysis.”23

Within the UK, The thirty year rule, cabinet and other government documentation has

been restricted from public access for a period of 30 years, having been reduced

from the original fifty years in 1997. In 2013 it was announced that by 2022 this will

be reduced to 20 years.24 This reduction will assist in writing a credible history in the

future. After this period documents designated as to be kept are passed to the

National Archive unless there are legitimate reasons for keeping them out of the

public domain.

20 MI6. “Our History” https://www.sis.gov.uk/our-history.html accessed 03/12/2014. 21 The National Archives, Intelligence and security services.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/research-guides/intelligence-records.htm. Accessed Online 20/11/2014. 22 Andrew, Christopher. Secret Service, (London, 1985). p1. 23 C.M. Andrew and D. Dilks (eds.), The Missing Dimension: Governments and Intelligence

Communities in the Twentieth Century (London: Macmillan 1982) pp.4–5. 24 The National Archives, The 20 year Rule. http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/about/20-year-rule.htm Accessed Online 28/11/2014.

8

Unfortunately the nature of Intelligence means records are often kept secret for

much longer, this retention for all that it frustrates scholars is both legal and

necessary. This retention is not however the only reason for gaps to have occurred.

It would not be feasible to keep every document created and therefore documents

not “selected for permanent preservation are routinely destroyed.” This decision is all

based on legal guidelines laid out in the original Public Records Act of 195825.

Stephen Lander admits that MI5 records are not in themselves as complete as we

may believe. “[T]here has in the past been an inconsistent approach to file

destruction, and a lot was destroyed that we wish had not been following both world

wars.” In the same address he explains that he can understand academic frustration

at this predicament as he himself was an historian. Moreover he stated that: ‘We

also have the German Luftwaffe to thank for the destruction of a proportion of our

records when in September 1940 a bomb hit a Wormwood Scrubs outbuilding that

housed our registry’. This is, however, the official explanation of an intelligence

organization by its self-proclaimed “Chief Spook”26 and may need a pinch of salt.

Despite the ever more open culture some records still remain sealed and

inaccessible. Moreover there secrecy means that their existence is neither confirmed

nor denied. This is a bone of contention for historians. Andrew, MI5’s professional

historian for their centenary project, writes scathingly in his previous work about the

service’s document retention. When he later accepted the privileged access that

25 Legislation, Gov. UK, Public Records Act 1958 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/6-7/51/section/3.

Accessed Online 02/12/2014 26 Lander, Stephen. “British intell igence in the twentieth century”, Intelligence and National Security, 17:1, (2002) pp 7-2.,

9

being ‘their’ historian brought.27 He switched his annoyance to those facts which

were considered too sensitive to publish.

The official centennial history of the Secret Intelligence service in comparison to

Andrew’s right up to date publication was only to consider its beginning in 1909 to

1949.28 There is therefore an obvious difference surrounding the information

available about the various Intelligence organisations. These differences would need

to be considered to enable a balanced history to be written.

Despite losses, retention, destruction and other possible gaps, access is granted to

considerably more information about the activities of the Intelligence community in

the 20th Century than it can be possible to find about Medieval Britain, for example,

and we would not shy from accepting the idea of a history being written about the

battles of Bosworth or Agincourt. Indeed whilst frustrated by lack of access when

writing Secret Service, Andrew credits the lack of access with assisting him in

finishing the book, “Official attempts to conceal most of the intelligence archive have

inevitably complicated my research. But, on balance, they have probably hastened

this book’s completion.”29 Even the records in the public domain are vast in number

and disparate in location being found around the world in the hands of both allies

and former enemies. The German Government released records of the Stasi in

1991 that broke information about SIS’ actions in East Germany before they had

been officially avowed in the United Kingdom30.

27 Andrew. The Defence of the Realm. p xxi 28 Jeffrey, Keith. MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service 1909-1949. (London and New York, 2010). 29 Andrew, Christopher. Secret service. (London, 1985) p xvi. 30 Maddrell, Paul. “British Intell igence through the Eyes of the Stasi: What the Stasi's Records Show about the Operations of British Intell igence in Cold War Germany”, Intelligence and National Security, 27:1, (2012) pp 46-74,

10

When testing how possible it is to write a history of British Intelligence in the 20 th

Century, it must be accepted that the history would naturally be imperfect with the

potential need for revision as more documents came to light, but this is true of history

from any era. In 2003 Phillip Knightley updated his 1986 work ‘The Second Oldest

Profession’31 This “what if” factor is certainly no reason to avoid writing about what

Andrew and Dilks coin “The Missing Dimension”, no more than it is a reason not to

study Theology or Theoretical Physics.

The chain of official documents available through release due to the 30 year rule will

currently end before the end of the twentieth century, but this gap is rapidly reducing

and given the length of time it would take to research such a large undertaking this

may cease to be an issue very soon.

Official documents alone however do not make a history and some belated steps

have been taken to record the personal histories of, for example, members of SOE

and MI5, Stephen Lander explained MI5 had started making taped recordings in

2006, however, much has already been lost as people have passed away. These

were possibly the last generation who actually believed that they could be executed

should they reveal information about national security before being given permission

to do so which can go some way to explaining their dignified silence but the cultural

taboo of loose talk was also a factor.

The Fourth estate of news media and journalism also offer valuable insight for the

Intelligence historian. Indeed, there have been Histories written about British

Intelligence, such as those by Richard Aldrich, Nigel West and Phillip Knightley, that

rely on open source material, private memoirs and the ability to piece the story

31 Knightley. The Second Oldest Profession. Title Page

11

together from different sources. There is also the potential to use the triangulation of

sources to confirm things that are “possible” “Triangulation is the combination of at

least two or more … data sources, investigators, or data analysis methods. The

intent of using triangulation is to decrease, negate, or counterbalance the deficiency

of a single strategy, thereby increasing the ability to interpret the findings”32 As long

as the sources are independent of each other, should they confirm the same

information, there is a higher chance of that information being accurate and credible.

“History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.”

― Winston S. Churchill.

The emphasis on credibility within this work is paramount. But the shadow world of

intelligence and espionage is, at the same time, one where trust is both crucial and

often lacking. Bernard Porter, an historian of the British Empire, comments, in his

review of Andrew’s ‘Defence of the Realm’, that ‘’Spooks’… are vocational liars,

dissemblers, falsifiers and hiders of things’33. And he has, to an extent, got a point.

The Oxford English Dictionary definition of credible is ‘Able to be believed in,

justifying confidence; convincingly honest, principled, or authentic and often, as a

corollary, accurate’.34 Leaving aside the content of the history, the person chosen as

its author is of vital importance and a poor choice could easily undermine the

credibility of the project as a whole. S. Fuller, in Kuhn vs Popper, notes that

“Epistemology - the theory of knowledge - is now more than ever preoccupied with

face-saving exercises to shore up expertise, the elusive quest for what philosophers

32 Thurmond, V. A. “The Point of Triangulation”. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33:25 (2001), pp 3–258. 33 Porter, Bernard. “Other People’s Mail”, London Review of Books. Vol.31:22 (2009) pp15-17. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n22/bernard-porter/other-peoples-mail. Accessed Online 30/11/2014. 34 . “Credible, adj. and n.” The Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed. OED Online. Oxford University Press). http://www.oed.com/ Accessed Online 03/12/2014.

12

call "credible testimony" and sociologists call, more brutally, "boundary

maintenance"35 Official Histories, for example, often suffer in credibility as they are

seen as having been paid for. But they often have much greater access to restricted

documents and personnel, better financial backing and more research resources.

In a preface to Andrew’s Authorised History of MI5 Jonathan Evans, then Director

General of MI5, is at pains to reassure us that “Giving Professor Andrew the

independence to reach his own conclusions, however well or badly they reflected on

the service, was a key element of the project.”36 In his case Andrew’s standing within

academic circles, as a subject matter expert, have seemed to help his credibility

despite his paid position. The Telegraph, unsurprisingly, was suitably gushing and

reviewed the work as “magisterial, authoritative, balanced, readable and, particularly

in the first half, full of wry humour and with an eye for the absurd”37.

The fact that the privileged access Andrew has been given means other academics

are unable to verify sources for themselves is discussed in a review of ‘Defence of

the Realm’. “Personally, I’m prepared to [trust] in Andrew’s case, especially as he is

often quite critical of the service:” wrote Porter, in his review of the book, for the

London Book Review38. A.W. Brian Simpson who is described in his Guardian

obituary as “one of the greatest academic lawyers of his generation in the fields of

legal history, legal philosophy and – more recently – human rights,39 Is less sure of

35 Fuller, Kuhn vs. Popper. p5. 36 Evans, Jonathan. 2009: “Foreword” Andrew, Christopher. The Defence of the Realm: The Authorised History of MI5. (London, 2009). p xv. 37 Lownie, Andrew. “The Defence of the Realm: The Authorized History of MI5 by Christopher Andrew: review.” The Telegraph (2009). http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/6325345/The-Defence-of-the-Realm-The-Authorized-History-of-MI5-by-Christopher-Andrew-review.html. Accessed 01/12/2014. 38 Porter, Bernard. “Other People’s Mail”, London Review of Books. Vol.31:22 (2009) pp15-17.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n22/bernard-porter/other-peoples-mail. Accessed Online 30/11/2014. 39 McCrudden, Christopher. “Brian Simpson Obituary”, The Guardian Online. (2011). http://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/feb/01/brian-simpson-obituary. Accessed 30/11/2014

13

Andrew’s credibility. He writes in a comment to the review, “The whole idea of

‘official’ histories of institutions such as MI5 is inherently problematic; in particular

one can never tell whether apparent defects in the history are to be blamed on the

author, or on the institution, or on some unholy alliance between them.40 Lord Dacre

sums up the potential difficulties. “When a historian relies mainly on primary sources,

which we cannot easily check, he challenges our confidence and forces us to ask

critical questions. How reliable is his historical method? How sound is his

Judgement?” To write a credible and detailed history of British Intelligence you

need, therefore, an historian who is acceptable to the authorities, who has enough of

an academic reputation but also one who is also trusted by the general public.

Perhaps Keith Jeffery, historian to MI6, for their centenary project, is most succinct.

He writes about being chosen to write the book, ‘I am well aware that the fact that I

have been deemed suitable to undertake it may in some eyes precisely render me

unsuitable.’41

In academic circles the politics and prejudice of the authors can further seem to

colour their work in a manner that suggests that potentially no one author should

attempt this task. There is a marked difference between the intelligence community

described by Andrew, who quotes, objectively, the report that created the special

bureau, saying that it was created to consider ‘the nature and extent of foreign

espionage that is at present taking place within this country and the danger to which

it may expose us’ and that same organisation, described by Knightley, who wrote

40 Simpson, A.W.Brian. Letter Attached to - “Other People’s Mail”, London Review of Books. Vol.31:22 (2009)

pp15-17. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n22/bernard-porter/other-peoples-mail. Accessed Online 30/11/2014. 41 Jeffrey, Keith. MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service 1909-1949. (London and New York, 2010). Preface

14

that it was, ‘created to steal secrets from other countries and to protect its own.”42

However much, the independent status of, someone like Knightley would answer the

critic’s fears about outside influence, the more subjective tone would need a

steadying hand. Such a collaboration, whilst theoretically ideal, would perhaps in

practice fail at the first fence.

The national paradigm should also be considered, would an author from a different

nation have a fresher point of view on the British Intelligence Community? Living in a

relatively free democracy will mean that a British author may take a different

approach to the work than one from a stricter regime. This would have to be an

independent study as clearances would be unlikely for a foreign national.

One of the most difficult aspects of writing a credible history of any Intelligence

agency is, that conclusions will need to be made using what James Der Derian calls

an “Intertextual approach”. De Derian quotes semiologist Roland Barthes definition,

“a multi-dimensional space in which a variety of writings, none of them original, blend

and clash” Put simply because there is no final perfect analysis or correct answer,

especially when no concrete proof exists, any work will be both, a personal analysis

and conclusion of often widely differing points of view.43

It is necessary to determine the audience for whom the History is intended. Long

before Andrew was employed to write his published history MI5 had commissioned

an internal history by John Curry44. In house histories have the advantage that those

reading them have been vetted and are party to the official secrets act. Given that

42 Andrew. The Defence of the Realm.p3 and Knightley. The Second Oldest Profession. p1 43 Der Derian, James. 1994: “Anti -Diplomacy, Intell igence Theory and Survei l lance Practice”. In Wesley, K. Wark

(ed.), Espionage: Past, Present, Future. Great Britain: Frank Cass & Co.LTD, pp29-51. 44 Lander, Stephen. “British intell igence in the twentieth century”, Intelligence and National Security, 17:1, (2002) pp 7-2.,

15

they are not destined for a critical audience however their credibility, once released,

may be contended. After all they are writing about their employer and are possibly

more heavily burdened than Andrew claimed to be.

The demands on writing for an academic audience, in terms of the required burden

of proof, could be complicated by incomplete available records. They should,

however, be more amenable to fact that does not conform to preconceived ideas

from fiction and conspiracy theories.

Writing popular history requires the historian not only to answer a burden of proof but

the conclusions will be judged also on how they sit with the popular zeitgeist.

Especially in today’s media obsessed world the credibility of a work may be

damaged by something completely unrelated.

The subject itself is complex, and has arguably more challenges than others. James

De Derian writes of a comment made, by soviet academic Nikolai Yakovlev, at the

opening of the latter’s book ‘CIA Target -The USSR’. Nikolai states that, ‘any

analysis of Western secret services is bound to be difficult. It is like hewing one’s

way through a dark jungle of confusing, sometimes totally confounding, facts.’45

Andrew reminds us that ‘the success of a security service is better judged by things

that do not happen (which are necessarily unquantifiable) than by the things that

they do.’46 For a historian this focus on being a difficult target makes it much harder

to work out to what extent a success was the responsibility of the service.

Performance indicators, so beloved by governments, are, as he discusses,

practically impossible to measure for a negative value. Possibly documents such as

45 Der Derian. 1994: “Anti-Diplomacy, Intell igence Theory and Surveillance Practice”. In Wesley, K. Wark (ed.), Espionage: Past, Present, Future. Great Britain: Frank Cass & Co.LTD, pp29-51. 46Andrew. The Defence of the Realm. p841

16

the Stasi releases, or those from America, may be able to bridge some gaps. In his

article about the SIS’ place in Stasi records, Paul Maddrell, mentions that they had a

good opinion of SIS’ capabilities. Knowing the positive opinion of an enemy is most

useful, although their motivation may need to be considered, after all a success

against a strong force would better suit a report.47 This nature to use Optimism Bias

is well documented.48 Obviously in terms of resources, financially, the need to travel

widely, such as Richard Aldrich deemed necessary for ‘GCHQ’, going to Canada, the

USA and Australia would constitute a large burden to most academic salaries49.

The fact that more data is rapidly being released that would enable a credible

twentieth century history of British intelligence, must be appreciated but there is a

caveat that needs to be considered. Currently as Andrew writes, in regards to

misfiled documents that should have been kept secret, ‘Whitehall… is nowadays

reluctant to make itself ridiculous by reclaiming them’ Can it be assumed for the

future that this will remain the case. Whilst we are currently in a world where

openness is a watchword, the world at large seems to be slipping back in time. In

November 2007, Jonathan Evans, then Director General of MI5 stated in an address

to the Society of Editors “Since the end of the Cold War we have seen no decrease

in the numbers of undeclared Russian intelligence officers in the UK - at the Russian

Embassy and associated organisations conducting covert activity in this country”50

China is currently facing off against students in Hong Kong and IS is considered a

47 Maddrell. “British Intell igence through the Eyes of the Stasi”, Intelligence and National Security, 27:1, (2012) pp 46-74, 48 Spackman, Michael. “Public Investment and Discounting in European Union Member States”. OECD Journal on Budgeting. (2001) pp213-260 49 15. Aldrich, Richard. J. GCHQ. (London, 2010). 50 Evans, Jonathan “Address to the Society of Editors by the Director General of the Security Service,” The

Society of Editors' 'A Matter of Trust' conference, (2007). https://www.mi5.gov.uk/home/about-us/who-we-are/staff-and-management/director-general/speeches-by-the-director-general/intell igence-counter-terrorism-and-trust.html. Accessed Online 02/12/2014.

17

very real threat. Harry Ferguson, a former MI6 officer and now author, in a BBC

Interview with Journalist Luke Jones, says it has ‘"actually gone backwards" in terms

of openness. Plans for a press office were scrapped and a BBC series which MI6

collaborated on was greatly cut down after the "dodgy Iraq dossier scandal" in 2003.

"All of a sudden it was a case of batten down the hatches. All in a couple of days." ’51

It must be hoped that nothing else creates reasoning that would cause more records

to be retained.

In his introduction to the book ‘The Study of Espionage: Past, Present, Future?’

Wesley K Wark reminds us that “One hundred years ago, intelligence was hardly a

subject for polite discourse in the academy”52 it may just be over one hundred years

ago now that this feeling prevailed but that intervening time has seen not only an

academic field of interest arise and an industry grow up but also an increase in the

public interest.

Interest in intelligence history and intelligence present seems, today, to be

boundless. There is current public interest in fact as well as fiction. Sinclair McKay

author of “The secret Life of Bletchley Park” and “The British Spy Manual” amongst

others, has been on British daytime television at least twice in the last month

including “Ocado’s Daily Brunch” on 2nd December53. The sensationally successful

BBC Drama “Spooks” ran for ten seasons from 2002-201154 and of course the

enduring legacies of both Le Carre and Ian Fleming mean that publishers will have

51 Jones, Luke. “The time when spy agencies officially didn't exist”. BBC News Magazine Online (2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29938135. Accessed Online 01/12/2014. 52 Wark, Wesley. K. 1994: “Introduction”. Wesley, K. Wark (ed.), Espionage: Past, Present, Future. Great Britain: Frank Cass & Co.LTD, pp1-13. 53 Channel 4, Episode 37. http://www.channel4.com/programmes/daily-brunch-with-ocado/episode-guide.

Accessed Online 02/12/2014 54 IMDB “Spooks” http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0160904/?ref_=ttep_ep_tt accessed online 30/11/2014

18

money to spend on this topic, which only increases the chance for a commercial

history of British Intelligence. Intelligence conferences occur around the world, such

as that held biennially at Aberystwyth, and the Journal of ‘Intelligence and National

Security’ complements the many books that have been written on elements of the

subject. Intelligence History, though still a relatively new subject, has a wide

audience from disparate groups. As an academic study it has a place in History,

Politics, International Relations, Journalism, and Literature. It has professional

audiences also and an International reach as enemies and allies alike look to learn

from mistakes, emulate best practice and try to get into the minds of the British

Intelligence community.

In conclusion, this work considers it has shown that with the current interest in the

subject, the current academic climate and at this time, writing a credible history of

British Intelligence in the 20th century whilst a real test of resources and academic

skill would not be completely impossible. It would, potentially, require access to files

not likely to be available for some time, if ever, from several organisations, however,

these gaps may be circumvented. It would require international research and a real

understanding of the National Archives alongside a great working relationship with

the archivists both there and in other archives nationally and internationally. It would,

however, have a much better foundation, of both primary sources and secondary

works available for research, than had it been attempted even ten years ago.

With the right balance of academic ability and journalistic instinct a credible history

that addressed gaps with honesty and where possible used a triangulation of

sources would, in balance, be possible. It would rely heavily on works that had gone

before and would require a lot of faith be placed in other historian’s work – but that is

19

no different to work completed in other areas of study. And indeed the variance of

opinion on some matters is one of the interesting aspects of this politically charged

subject. The vast nature of the subject would, indeed, need a collaborative approach

and to have access to large resources including: financial, time and of staff. It is the

conclusion of this work that whilst a credible academic history is indeed possible it

may only be possible in tandem with a more populist work as this potentially would

assist with funding the research.

Bibliography

Primary Sources:

Kell, Vernon. “Kell’s Bureau’s six monthly progress reports” KV1/9 National Archives

(1909-1914).

Books:

1. Andrew, Christopher. The Defence of the Realm: The Authorised History of MI5.

(London, 2009).

2. Andrew, Christopher. Secret Service. (London, 1985).

3. Knightley, Phillip. The Second Oldest Profession: Spies and Spying in the

Twentieth Century. (Revised Edn.) (London, 2003).

4. Goodman, Michael. S. The Official History of the Joint Intelligence Committee:

Volume 1: From the Approach of the Second World War to the Suez Crisis. (London

and New York, 2014).

5. Fuller, S. Kuhn vs. Popper: The Struggle for the Soul of Science, (Cambridge,

2003)

20

6. Hannant, Larry. 1994: “Access to the Inside: An Assessment of ‘Canada’s Security

Service: A History’.” In Wesley, K. Wark (ed.), Espionage: Past, Present, Future.

Great Britain: Frank Cass & Co.LTD, pp149-159.

7. Der Derian, James. 1994: “Anti-Diplomacy, Intelligence Theory and Surveillance

Practice”. In Wesley, K. Wark (ed.), Espionage: Past, Present, Future. Great Britain:

Frank Cass & Co.LTD, pp29-51.

8. Wark, Wesley. K. 1994: “Introduction”. Wesley, K. Wark (ed.), Espionage: Past,

Present, Future. Great Britain: Frank Cass & Co.LTD, pp1-13.

9. Andrew, Christopher. Secret Service, (London, 1985).

10. Evans, Jonathan. 2009: “Foreword” Andrew, Christopher. The Defence of the

Realm: The Authorised History of MI5. (London, 2009).

11. Aldrich, Richard. J. Espionage, security and intelligence in Britain 1945-1970.

(Manchester and New York, 1998)

12. West, Nigel. At Her Majesties Secret Service. (London, 2006)

13. Jeffreys-Jones, Rhodri. In Spies We Trust: the story of Western Intelligence.

(Oxford 2013)

14. West, Nigel. GCHQ. (London, 1986).

15. Aldrich, Richard. J. GCHQ. (London, 2010).

16. Jeffrey, Keith. MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service 1909-1949.

(London and New York, 2010).

Journal Articles:

1. Breakspear, Alan. “A New Definition of Intelligence”. Intelligence and National

Security, 28, (2013) pp678-693.

21

2. Lander, Stephen. “British intelligence in the twentieth century”, Intelligence and

National Security, 17:1, (2002) pp 7-2.,

3. Bennett, Gill. “Declassification and release policies of the UK's Intelligence

Agencies”, Intelligence and National Security, 17:1, (2002) pp21-32,

4. Maddrell, Paul. “British Intelligence through the Eyes of the Stasi:

What the Stasi's Records Show about the Operations of British Intelligence in Cold

War Germany”, Intelligence and National Security, 27:1, (2012) pp 46-74,

5. Thurmond, V. A. “The Point of Triangulation”. Journal of Nursing Scholarship,

33:25 (2001), pp 3–258.

6. Heine, .S. and Lehman, D.R. “Cultural Variation in Unrealistic Optimism: Does the

West Feel More Invulnerable than the East? Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology. (1995) 68:4, pp595-697.

Spackman, Michael. “Public Investment and Discounting in European Union Member

States”. OECD Journal on Budgeting. (2001) pp213-260

Online Databases:

1. Hiley, Nicholas. “Kell, Sir Vernon George Waldegrave (1873–1942).” Nicholas

Hiley Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Ed. H. C. G. Matthew and Brian

Harrison. Oxford: OUP, 2004. Online ed. Ed. Lawrence Goldman. Jan. 2011. 24 Oct.

2014 <http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/37625>.

2. Andrew, Christopher. “Cumming, Sir Mansfield George Smith (1859–1923).”

Robert Brown Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Ed. H. C. G. Matthew and

Brian Harrison. Oxford: OUP, 2004. Online ed. Ed. Lawrence Goldman. Jan. 2012.

27 Oct. 2014 <http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/37331>.

22

3. “Intelligence, n.” The Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed. OED Online. Oxford

University Press). http://www.oed.com/ Accessed Online 03/12/2014.

4. “Credible, adj. and n.” The Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed. OED Online. Oxford

University Press). http://www.oed.com/ Accessed Online 03/12/2014.

5. “History, n.” The Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed. OED Online. Oxford University

Press). http://www.oed.com/ Accessed Online 03/12/2014.

Websites

1. BBC News Online. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3460275.stm accessed

27/11/2014.

2. McCrudden, Christopher. “Brian Simpson Obituary”, The Guardian Online. (2011).

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/feb/01/brian-simpson-obituary. Accessed

30/11/2014

3. Porter, Bernard. “Other People’s Mail”, London Review of Books. Vol.31:22 (2009)

pp15-17. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n22/bernard-porter/other-peoples-mail. Accessed

Online 30/11/2014.

4. Simpson, A.W.Brian. Letter Attached to - “Other People’s Mail”, London Review of

Books. Vol.31:22 (2009) pp15-17. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n22/bernard-porter/other-

peoples-mail. Accessed Online 30/11/2014.

5. IMDB “Spooks” http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0160904/?ref_=ttep_ep_tt accessed

online 30/11/2014

6. MI6. “Our History” https://www.sis.gov.uk/our-history.html accessed 03/12/2014.

23

7. Evans, Jonathan “Address to the Society of Editors by the Director General of the

Security Service,” The Society of Editors' 'A Matter of Trust' conference, (2007).

https://www.mi5.gov.uk/home/about-us/who-we-are/staff-and-management/director-

general/speeches-by-the-director-general/intelligence-counter-terrorism-and-

trust.html. Accessed Online 02/12/2014.

8. Jones, Luke. “The time when spy agencies officially didn't exist”. BBC News

Magazine Online (2014) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29938135. Accessed

Online 01/12/2014.

9. The National Archives, The 20 year Rule.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/about/20-year-rule.htm Accessed Online

28/11/2014.

10. The National Archives, Intelligence and security services.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/research-guides/intelligence-

records.htm. Accessed Online 20/11/2014.

11. Legislation.Gov. UK, Freedom of Information Act 2000. (2000)

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/contents accessed online 02/12/2014.

12. Debretts, John major. http://www.debretts.com/people-of-

today/profile/1781/John-MAJOR. Accessed Online 03/12/2014

13. Lownie, Andrew. “The Defence of the Realm: The Authorized History of MI5 by

Christopher Andrew: review.” The Telegraph (2009).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/6325345/The-Defence-of-the-Realm-The-

24

Authorized-History-of-MI5-by-Christopher-Andrew-review.html. Accessed

01/12/2014.

14. Legislation, Gov. UK, Public Records Act 1958

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/6-7/51/section/3. Accessed Online

02/12/2014

15. Channel 4, Episode 37. http://www.channel4.com/programmes/daily-brunch-with-

ocado/episode-guide. Accessed Online 02/12/2014.