Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Jun 5, 2022 10:52:16 GMT -8
The Spy and the Traitor by Ben Macintyre I'm not sure if this book qualifies better as a biography or a history. But it's definitely biographical regarding MI6 spy, Oleg Gordievsky. But there is enough background content that this reads like a history as well. And the reason I can recommend it (I'm about 50% through it) is because it also reads like a novel. The author has done a good job of presenting the story. The only bias I've picked up so far is that he's dismissive of Reagan even while seemingly thinking highly of Thatcher. And need another reason to hate unions? Well, yeah. They are often enough villainous. Unions have typically been subversive and hotbeds of Communist sympathy if not outright supporters thereof. Anyway, there are plenty of stories like this sprinkled throughout the book to keep it interesting, at least to the halfway point.
|
|
kungfuzu
Member
Posts: 10,469
Member is Online
|
Post by kungfuzu on Jun 5, 2022 11:08:15 GMT -8
In this case, the leader was a known communist named Arthur Scargill , who was known as "Red Arthur" or something like that. I remember the man as I was visiting friends in the U.K. during the period which led up to the coal strike of 1974. Then I closely followed Thatcher and her plans to fight the coming coal strike in 1984. She prepared very openly. Stockpiles of coal were made across the U.K. in anticipation of the strike. In the end, Thatcher broke the miners' union and Scargill was humiliated.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Jun 11, 2022 14:51:17 GMT -8
I finished The Spy and the Traitor. And it's really a very well-written book...a real page-turner. I highly recommend it. You might learn some history – at least I did.
With the level of knowledge here of spying and the Soviet Union, I doubt whether I can offer any spoilers. But what I found interesting is that as the end of this story beckoned, I thought less and less of Oleg Gordievsky.
And not because he was a traitor. Any traitor to the Soviet Union and KGB, whatever their motive, is more than welcome. But the guy just seemed to be a little full of himself.
Yes, he took great risks. Yes, he was highly useful to the West. But there was one incident at the end of this that really nailed home what one could only call his personal recklessness and narcissism. And this is where a spoiler could come in if you don't know how the attempt at his escape turned out.
Anyway, near the very end of a long chain of events required to try to get him out of Russia, instead of sitting tight (as was the plan) at a turnout near the Finnish border and waiting to make contact with British agents, Oleg hitchhikes to a nearby town and sits in a restaurant and has a meal. He then realizes at some point that – oops – it's getting near the time when he is supposed to meet the British agents at the agreed-upon meeting place. He is 15 miles from the meeting place and has only an hour and twenty minutes to get there. So he starts jogging back.
He does make it back (he hitched another ride, further increasing his chances of being captured). And when he gets back, instead of sticking to the plan and hanging tight at the meeting place, he starts walking down the main highway with the thought of meeting the British agents when they came in their car. (They were driving from Moscow.) He then finally gets it into his head that the KGB could be on this highway with cars (as is usual...he was, after all, a top official in the KGB) placed fore and aft the British cars. (The Brits had a caravan of two cars, ostensibly to get a serious ill member of the consulate to a hospital in Helsinki.)
This was a yugely risky plan, and not just for Oleg. M16 in coordination with Mi5, Danish intelligence, and (to a basic extent) even Finish intelligence had this plan laid out and it required an enormous amount of effort to have it ready through the years in case it was needed.
There's a sense that this guy left a swath of destruction behind him. And, no, we care not at all that many of these people harmed were KGB agents or people who had ties with the KGB. But this was a guy who, despite the accolades laid on him, was probably not a guy you would ever want to depend on. But he was extremely useful for the West in understanding the mindset of the Soviets and to understanding (as never before) the inner workings of the KGB. He's a heroic icon in that regard. But there was probably a good reason that Oleg's first handler didn't trust the man and was somewhat surprised and underwhelmed when he heard that Oleg had defected. He was never convinced of this guy's loyalty in the first place.
|
|