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

1
Is it Possible to write a credible history of British Intelligence in the 20th 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, Phillip. TheSecond 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.Onlineed. 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. Onlineed. 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 “Intelligence, n.” The Oxford English Dictionary,3rd ed. OED Online.Oxford University Press).
http://www.oed.com/ Accessed Online03/12/2014.
9 Breakspear,Alan. “A New Definition of Intelligence”. 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).

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 releasepolicies of the UK's IntelligenceAgencies”, 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
Online03/12/2014
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 intelligencein 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 intelligencein 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 Intelligence through the Eyes of the Stasi:
What the Stasi's Records Showabout the Operations of British Intelligencein 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 20th
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 Online30/11/2014.
34 . “Credible, adj.and n.” The Oxford English Dictionary,3rd ed. OED Online.Oxford University Press).

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 Online30/11/2014.
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 Online30/11/2014.
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,IntelligenceTheory and SurveillancePractice”.In Wesley,K. Wark
(ed.), Espionage: Past, Present, Future. Great Britain:Frank Cass & Co.LTD, pp29-51.
44 Lander, Stephen. “British intelligencein 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, IntelligenceTheory and SurveillancePractice”.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 Intelligencethrough the Eyes of the Stasi”,Intelligence and National Security, 27:1, (2012)
pp 46-74,
48 Spackman, Michael.“Public Investment and Discountingin 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/intelligence-counter-terrorism-
and-trust.html. Accessed Online02/12/2014.

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'texist”. BBC News Magazine Online (2014)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29938135. Accessed Online01/12/2014.
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 online30/11/2014

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.

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

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

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

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

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