Peter Apps at Reuters.com offers a column how Ian Fleming's iconic James Bond character is the United Kingdom's greatest intelligence asset.
In the 62 years since James Bond first appeared in print, there's no doubt he
has helped boost the reputations of his real-life counterparts in British
intelligence.
Now,
Daniel Craig - the truest to author Ian Fleming's original vision since Sean
Connery, if not ever - is back on screen in "Spectre." The franchise is as
strong as ever.
In
reality, however, the decades since Fleming first penned "Casino Royale" have
been distinctly mixed for the United Kingdom and its spies.
For
sure, the Secret Intelligence Service - traditionally known to its members as
SIS and to the rest of the world as MI6 - and its sister service MI5 retain a
world-class reputation. They are in good company. The reach and skill set of
those two agencies - responsible for foreign and domestic intelligence,
respectively - are more than equaled by signals intelligence specialists
Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ). Britain's special forces - the
Army's Special Air Service (SAS) and Royal Marines' Special Boat Service (SBS)
are also legendary.
They
have, however, been far from infallible. Even as Fleming wrote of their prowess
in the early 1950s, some stellar embarrassments loomed.
Throughout
the late 1950s and 60s, Whitehall (one-word shorthand for the UK's version of
the State Department, the Pentagon and CIA and FBI headquarters) was torn apart
by slow-burning scandal as news emerged that some of Britain's most trusted
intelligence officials had in fact been spying for the Soviet Union. More
recently, there have been controversies over officials' complicity in torture
and rendition, as well is the small matter of their intelligence-gathering
related to Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
Bond
and his fellow fictional British operatives, however, allow UK intelligence to
project an image that goes well beyond the niggling issues of reality.
It
might have only the most tangential relationship to what really happens, but it
still has real-world impact.
A
couple of years ago at a drinks reception in Washington, a former CIA official
told me he believed neither he nor anyone else in the U.S. government would ever
turn down a briefing from British intelligence. It wasn't just about the quality
of the material, he said - good though it often was.
Even
the phrase "British intelligence," he said, had a mystique, glamour and style
that was intrinsically fascinating. He suspected British officials were well
aware of it, he added, and deliberately styled themselves accordingly.
You can read the rest of the column via the below link:
I wonder if George Smiley adds positive cache to U.K. prestige.
ReplyDeleteR.T.,
ReplyDeletePeter Apps states that it was not just James Bond, but also George Smiley...
You might be interested to know that John le Carre's former MI5 boss and mentor, John Bingham, the man whom many believe le Carre based Smiley on, hated le Carre's portrayal of the British security services.
Many other Brit intel officers feel the same way.
You might also be interested in reading my column about Fleming & le Carre at http://www.pauldavisoncrime.com/2010/08/spy-writer-vs-spy-writer-john-le-carre.html
I like le Carre's earlier novels, but the later ones are much to anti-American and left wing for my taste.
Paul
Thanks for the link, Paul. I look forward to reading it. As for Smiley and Le Carre, I agree with you; the earlier -- less leftist -- novels are purer entertainments than the later non-Smiley offerings. Still, Le Carre certainly set the standard for his descendants in the genre. Who out there is doing the best work in the genre now? I should expand my reading list. Your Rx will be welcomed.
ReplyDelete