WHO'S ACCOUNTABLE FOR EMBASSY SPYING?
Document Type:
Collection:
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST):
CIA-RDP90-00965R000503980022-6
Release Decision:
RIPPUB
Original Classification:
K
Document Page Count:
1
Document Creation Date:
December 22, 2016
Document Release Date:
January 20, 2012
Sequence Number:
22
Case Number:
Publication Date:
March 31, 1987
Content Type:
OPEN SOURCE
File:
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
CIA-RDP90-00965R000503980022-6.pdf | 81.77 KB |
Body:
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/20: CIA-RDP90-00965R000503980022-6
1 _ LOS ANGELES TIMES
ARTICLE APPEARED 31 March 1987
ON PAGE 7. &Zsa
Who's Accountable for Embassy Spying?
7P By BERNARD McMAHON
When arp we going t? wake up.and stop
the Soviets from spying on us in our own
embassy in Moscow?
By diplomatic protocol, our embassy is
sovereign territory. Yet we suffer the out-
rage of Soviet violations again and again;
we have consistently been the mouse to the
Soviet cat. The Soviets have planted a
listening device in the seal of the United
States behind the ambassador's desk, bom-
barded the building with electromagnetic
carrier waves, tunneled into the basement
and built an elaborate eavesdropping an-
tenna in the embassy chimney, stolen the
embassy typewriters and rigged them to
transmit every-letter, powdered our em-
ployees with traceable "yellow" dust, infil-
trated KGB officers onto the embassy staff
and engineered and built the new embassy
building from the ground up as a marvel of
technical espionage.
It is not that we have been taken by sur-
prise by these Soviet violations: We have
known for years that the embassy is No. 1
on the KGB target list. We have our own
espionage techniques, and have long rec-
ognized the vulnerability of the building
and people located in the center of Moscow.
Security personnel from the State De-
partment, the Defense Department and
the intelligence agencies affected have
done surveys, analyses and investigations.
They have written detailed instructions
and tried to implement a host of defensive
procedures.
Despite this, their rule requiring a con-
tinuous chain of custody over new elec-
tronics equipment was broken. The rule
against Soviet access to sensitive areas in
the new building was broken. The rule
against fraternization with Soviet citizens
was flagrantly broken by officially sanc-
tioned parties where female KGB officers
mixed with young single Marines inside the
embassy compound.
What's the problem? Simply put, it is a
pervasive irresponsibility on the part of our
diplomatic community in Moscow-irre-
sponsibility derived from the overall fail-
ure of our government to hold those in
authority accountable for the loss of infor-
mation that is vital to our national security,
For example, the State Department still
scoffs at the "threat" posed by Soviet
citizens working on embassy telephone
switchboards, in the car pool, as maids,
rtceptionista and clerks. From the ambas.
sador on down, the view is that we know
that the Soviets spy on us, but not to worry,
we just won't say anythingelassified.
Intelligence professionals are appalled
by this attitude. They know how valuable
every random bit of information is. They
know how valuable personal data are, for
recruiting apes. They know how small
Pieces fit into a larger mosaic. At the
directioir of Congress, Soviet citizens are
now out of the embassy. But who knows
what they took with them or what they left
behind? -
If convicted, Marine Sgt. Clayton J.
Lonetree and Cpl. Arnold Bracey must
answer for their breaches of faith, and
rightly so, Burthe tragedy, and the heart of
the problem, is that they alone will stand
accountable. What about the regional se-
curity officer for whom they worked? Who
let the typewriters go astray? Who allowed
the Soviets to electronically capture our
new embassy? What about the other em-
bassy employees who regularly attended
dance nights in the embassy with Lone-
tree and Bracey? What about Ambassador
Arthur Hartman himself?
If thousands of dollars in cash rather
than millions of dollars in intelligence had
been stolen, accountability would be clear
and justice swift. Why are not those in
authority held equally accountable for our
national secrets?
Until they are, indifference will persist,
security will suffer, and next week or next
year we will read once again about the
latest Soviet espionage triumph.
Bernard McMahon was the staff director
for the Senate Intelligence Committee during
the 99th Congress.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/20: CIA-RDP90-00965R000503980022-6