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: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon CIA-RDP90-00965R000503980022-6.pdf81.77 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