Espionage

“We're a long way from the end of this”

Alger Hiss' son talks about his new memoir, "The View From Alger's Window," and the espionage case that wouldn't die.

  • more
    • All Share Services

Was Alger Hiss a dedicated public servant or a spy, a victim of Cold War hysteria or a secret communist? For half a century the question has roiled public debate, shaped discourse about honor and justice, split liberals into warring camps and rallied conservatives around the faith of anticommunism.

Hiss was the embodiment of New Deal liberalism. A graduate of Harvard Law School, he had clerked for the U.S. Supreme Court’s venerable Oliver Wendell Holmes and had given up a promising career in New York to join Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. He rose high in the State Department and served as secretary-general of the founding conference of the United Nations. By 1948, when he was accused of spying for the Soviets, he was president of a prominent philanthropic foundation, the Carnegie Endowment.

His accuser, Whittaker Chambers, presented a far cloudier image. An admitted ex-communist, the Time magazine writer packed a pistol at the office, harbored a secret homosexual past and muttered about the decline of Western civilization. Nevertheless, in testimony before the House Un-American Activities Committee, where Richard Nixon was an ambitious young unknown, Chambers laid Hiss low. Hiss fought back, accusing Chambers of slander. But following a first trial that ended in a hung jury, Hiss was convicted of perjuring himself about his involvement in espionage.

From March 1951 to November 1954, Hiss was confined in the federal prison at Lewisburg, Pa. After his release, his reputation in tatters, he found work as a salesman for a Manhattan printing firm. Though he always insisted on his innocence, he remained remarkably free of bitterness. He died in 1996 at the age of 92.

Tony Hiss, 57, a former staff writer at the New Yorker, recalls the once-a-month treks to Lewisburg that he and his mother, Priscilla, made to visit the famous father he barely knew. His new memoir, “The View From Alger’s Window” (Knopf), is a devoted son’s attempt to portray a man whose impeccable character made treason inconceivable. But the book is coming out at a time when scholarly opinion about Alger Hiss is increasingly hostile. Newly opened files from Soviet, U.S. and Hungarian sources have provided evidence that, some historians say, links him to Soviet espionage. And despite the lack of any smoking gun, this is also the conclusion of a trio of recent books: “Whittaker Chambers,” a 1997 biography by Sam Tanenhaus; the just-published “Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America” by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr; and “Perjury: the Hiss-Chambers Case” by Allen Weinstein, first published in 1978 and again two years ago in an edition that incorporates newly available archival material.

The contrary stance in “The View From Alger’s Window” is based largely on a cache of 2,500 letters, including 445 Alger Hiss wrote during his imprisonment. They show a man who reads the New Yorker and the Bible, sings in the prison choir, delights in classical music and teaches a small-time mobster to read. Out his window, his eyes feast on sunsets and stars. To his wife, he vows to make use of imprisonment as “a large opportunity for learning and growing.” To his son, he writes touching letters designed to impart lessons in coping and growing up. Buddha, Shakespeare and FDR show up in these letters, but there is not a word about Marx or communism.

My interview with Tony Hiss took place at the Greenwich Village apartment where he spent much of his early life. He lives there now with his wife, the young-adult novelist Lois Metzger, and their 7-year-old son, Jacob. Hiss pointed with pride to a handsome 18th century mirror that Justice Holmes willed to Alger Hiss. For the Hiss family, the mirror isn’t merely an antique — it’s an emblem of loyalty to American tradition.

If the charges against your father were false, do you have any idea why Chambers would have singled out your father?

In the ’60s a San Francisco psychiatrist named Meyer Zeligs wrote a quite interesting book, a joint psychobiography of Chambers and Hiss, “Friendship and Fratricide.” He turned out to be quite a good reporter. He discovered a fascinating fact: that this was not an isolated incident in Chambers’ life. He had a pattern of befriending someone, idolizing them, rejecting them and then trying to ruin them.

Allen Weinstein’s “Perjury” was begun with the assumption of your father’s innocence but concluded that there was “persuasive but not conclusive” evidence of his guilt. First published in ’78, it was acclaimed by both conservatives and liberals.

It received great acclaim from Cold War liberals. You have to remember that once the Cold War became part of everyone’s psyche, a whole generation of liberals came of age within that context. Many of them made it part of their self-definition that no one could pin the pinko label on them by accusing them of having sympathies for Alger Hiss — people like Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and John Kenneth Galbraith.

Yes, the book was hailed by those who had already accepted that notion, and it got a free ride as a result. It’s a very argumentative book. It is stuffed with footnotes, so it has the apparatus of scholarship. He would be happy to take any scrap of information, ambiguous as it is, and turn it to Alger’s disadvantage. There are Hungarian files released by Noel Field, a troubled person who had had a complicated relationship with Eastern European and Soviet forces. It’s true that he seems to have made some statements to communist interrogators in Hungary implicating Alger Hiss. But it also seems true that he made those statements while being tortured. Both before his imprisonment and after his release, he also made statements which repudiated those accusations.

The biography of Chambers by Sam Tanenhaus accepts the Noel Field statements implicating your father.

Well, he’s writing a very sympathetic, warm biography of Whittaker Chambers. Again, he’s not feeling much of a need to probe Chambers’ stories very deeply. It’s always been a desperate search to find material that might corroborate Chambers, because it’s always been one man’s word against another’s. To feel confident in a perjury case, you’re supposed to have two witnesses. Here there’s only one. So it’s always been a search for documents.

Yale University Press has just published “Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America” by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr. It concludes that there is “little doubt” that Alger spied for Soviet military intelligence, not only in the ’30s but into the ’40s, when he was a high official in the State Department.

That’s because there is this one cable that was intercepted and decoded [by the National Security Agency] that talks about a spy code-named “ALES.” It came with a footnote supplied by the FBI that said “probably Alger Hiss.” That cable said that “ALES” had a network [of spies] of his own, that this consisted primarily of his “relations” — you don’t know whether “relations” is a code name or family. It also says he was in touch with another code-named agent, who has been identified as Gregory Silvermaster. No one has ever shown any ties between Silvermaster and Alger.

The story just gets more and more complicated. For example, it’s now known that the U.S. Embassy in Moscow was in fact so penetrated by Soviet agents that for five or six years, during the time that Chambers said Alger was a spy, pretty much any document from Washington went straight to the Soviets. There were plenty of other candidates for being “ALES.”

Given these attacks, do you feel more besieged than ever?

Alger’s in more trouble than he ever was, and he’s no longer around to deny it. But I think that’s temporary, because rather than having this vast landscape of information around us, we have a vast sea of misinformation or lack of information. It’s going to take a long time before the water drains away and we know what we’re talking about.

Even Weinstein admits the “evidence is persuasive but not conclusive.”

They’re all very careful not to say that it has been demonstrated with certainty. I think it can be helpful to take a closer look at the man accused of these monstrous crimes and see what kind of a person he was. If you wish to be filled with some substance, you’re most vulnerable if you’re empty of some other set of values and convictions. Whereas my father was already full to the brim with purpose and vigor and history and tradition. He thought he was fighting the good fight.

The other dimension of my dad was someone of great resilience and resourcefulness who could find his way through what so easily might have been a devastating experience of losing his job and his reputation — sitting in the slammer and actually making something of it. I admire enormously someone who could say, and mean it, “Three years in jail is a good corrective to three years at Harvard.”

Are you still angry about what you and your parents had to go through?

It’s still an injustice crying out for remedy, but it is not something that I personally feel angry about, partly because my father seemed so amazingly transmuted and was never a bitter person. He always tried to learn from whatever experience came his way. That phrase by Malachy McCourt that I used in the book resonated with me: “Resentment is like taking a poison and waiting for the other fellow to die.”

You write that your son’s 7th birthday was very difficult for you. You had a terrible headache.

Because my own 7th birthday was the day for me when the troubles had begun. It was typical of my father’s headstrong nature that, for all his rationality, he met troubles head-on. That was the day he chose to go to Washington to go before the House Un-American Activities Committee to deny the charges that had just been made by Whittaker Chambers rather than come up to Vermont and be at my birthday party.

Why publish a memoir now?

His death certainly brought things together in my mind in a way we really don’t anticipate beforehand. And the interest in him has intensified in the last few years. So much of the hostile attention, it seemed to me, has to do not with the man I knew but with this strange, monstrous caricature that had formed in some people’s minds. I realized that the only story I could tell was about the person I got to know best, ironically, when he was in jail. I finally had him all to myself.

I assume you wanted to show a different Alger Hiss to the world, a gentle, playful Alger contemplating the nature of happiness and art and so on?

I wanted to write a personal book. I did not want to become just a part of the politicized debate about this case. I realized there was a separation between Alger as he presented himself to the world — often quite stuffy, cold and formal, lawyerly — and the man I had gotten to know, who was very playful, even silly and sweet, and fascinated by people and things around him, birds and sunsets. I think some of this inner Alger, ironically enough, welled up at this point, trying to come to terms with incarceration.

There was no suggestion in any of these letters that Alger was either a communist or a spy?

There’s not even any interest in the rubric of Marxism as a way of explaining the world. He got fascinated in Freudianism. There were countries that appealed to him as in some ways farther advanced than America, but they tended to be [places like] England and France. He was impressed by the English as communitarian and carrying forward the New Deal spirit. If he had been a spy, there’s an enormous irony: He certainly took incredible pains to bring me up to despise all the values that he was accused of having embodied. Loyalty and honesty and trustworthiness were the bedrock of what he was trying to instill in me.

As we know from the British scene, some of the famous Soviet spies, such as Kim Philby and Anthony Blount, were cultivated, well-educated gentlemen. Isn’t it possible that a man as devoted to social justice and as opposed to fascism as your father was would have turned to communism and even come to define spying as an honorable choice?

Yes. But it’s hard to remember that for others the challenge of the ’30s could also be met by what they considered the very radical action of joining the New Deal. This was not half-hearted, lily-livered, pusillanimous. Here was a young lawyer who deliberately left a high-paying, prestigious law firm in New York, took an incredible pay cut and stayed in Washington for about 14 years in order to help put his country back on its feet. He had been summoned by his mentor, professor Felix Frankfurter of Harvard Law School, who sent him a telegram: “On basis national emergency, you must report for duty.” Throughout his life, he boasted about being an unreconstructed New Dealer. This was in the tradition of the man who meant the most in his life, Oliver Wendell Holmes.

I’ve talked to people who were underground communists and asked them, “Is it possible, if that’s what you were, never to have confided in anyone?” From their point of view, this was psychologically an impossibility. You would have been so proud of it that you would have wanted someone to know about it.

From your point of view, might it have been easier, psychologically, if your father had been guilty and paid the price for his crimes? Now you’re in this limbo, as evidence of your father’s guilt mounts.

There have been a few selectively released documents that, when you sift through them, may or may not implicate him. The waters are in fact no less murky than they have ever been. The most astonishing and most overwhelming fact is that there is a huge amount of material, both in the former Soviet Union and in America, that is still under lock and key. The closed-door hearings of the House Un-American Activities Committee after 1944 are not scheduled to made public until the year 2026. In Russia, there are at least five major archives that are still off limits. The KGB files, where a few scholars have had sort of a dollars-for-documents access, are completely controlled by the KGB. Given all this, the scholars who will have all the evidence laid out in front of them and can dispassionately sift through it are probably undergraduates today. We’re a long way from the end of this.

Dan Cryer is a book critic for Newsday.

Did the CIA spy on Iraq war critic Juan Cole?

Former agency officer claims the Bush White House asked for personal information on antiwar blogger

  • more
    • All Share Services

Did the CIA spy on Iraq war critic Juan Cole?

The New York Times is reporting a former CIA officer’s claim that the Bush White House and the CIA asked operatives to spy on university professor, blogger (and frequent Salon contributor) Juan Cole in 2005 and 2006.

From James Risen’s Thursday morning Times piece:

Glenn L. Carle, a former Central Intelligence Agency officer who was a top counterterrorism official during the administration of President George W. Bush, said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information on [Professor Cole]. …

In an interview, Mr. Carle said his supervisor at the National Intelligence Council told him in 2005 that White House officials wanted “to get” Professor Cole, and made clear that he wanted Mr. Carle to collect information about him, an effort Mr. Carle rebuffed. Months later, Mr. Carle said, he confronted a C.I.A. official after learning of another attempt to collect information about Professor Cole. Mr. Carle said he contended at the time that such actions would have been unlawful.

If Carle’s claims are true, it would likely mean the CIA acted illegally; as former Agency lawyer Jeffrey H. Smith tells Risen: “The statute makes it very clear: you can’t spy on Americans.”

Cole has already responded to the news on his blog, calling for a full congressional investigation of Carle’s claims, which he says he believes are true:

It seems to me clear that the Bush White House was upset by my blogging of the Iraq War, in which I was using Arabic and other primary sources, and which contradicted the propaganda efforts of the administration attempting to make the enterprise look like a wild shining success.

Carle’s revelations come as a visceral shock. You had thought that with all the shennanigans of the CIA against anti-Vietnam war protesters and then Nixon’s use of the agency against critics like Daniel Ellsberg, that the Company and successive White Houses would have learned that the agency had no business spying on American citizens. …

I hope that the Senate and House Intelligence Committees will immediately launch an investigation of this clear violation of the law by the Bush White House and by the CIA officials concerned.

He concludes by telling readers “what alarms [him] most”: “I know I am a relatively small fish and it seems to me rather likely that I was not the only target of the baleful team at the White House.”

Continue Reading Close

Emma Mustich is a Salon contributor. Follow her on Twitter: @emustich.

“A Covert Affair”: Julia Child, spy girl

A new book tells the cloak-and-dagger story of the famous chef's early years in espionage

  • more
    • All Share Services

Shrewd marketing and its online equivalent, SEO (search engine optimization), dictate that Julia Child’s name gets top billing in both the title of Jennet Conant’s new nonfiction spy saga and in the headline for my review of the same. Yes, the famous French chef of cookbook and public television fame did work for the OSS (Office of Strategic Services), a U.S. intelligence agency, during World War II, as did Paul Child, the man she would eventually marry. However, Julia Child’s war was not so exciting as Jane Foster’s, and if Conant’s “A Covert Affair: Julia Child and Paul Child in the OSS” is somewhat of a bait-and-switch, providing more of Foster’s story than Child fans will expect, it’s hard to complain: Foster is such a remarkable, engaging, ambiguous character.

Foster and Julia McWilliams (Child’s maiden name) were part of a cohort of women (invariably referred to as “girls” by their colleagues) who signed up to work for William “Wild Bill” Donovan’s OSS during the war. They wanted to serve their country, but most of them — Julia especially — were looking for adventure, too. Foster’s ability to speak Malayan (the legacy of a brief marriage to a Dutch diplomat in her early 20s) and Julia’s superior administrative skills made them desirable recruits. So did their backgrounds.

Both women were from wealthy, prominent, conservative California families and had gone to tony women’s colleges, as did Betty MacDonald, one of Conant’s primary sources. The word around the OSS offices was that Donovan’s idea of the ideal female hire was “a cross between a Smith graduate, a Powers model and a Katie Gibbs secretary.” He liked to recruit rich Ivy Leaguers of both genders, reasoning that they were more resistant to bribes. Julia — tall, a bit gawky and unworldly — was intent on livening up her own personality after a youth spent in the narrow-minded upper echelons of Pasadena society. Foster, on the other hand, devoted herself to livening up everyone else’s.

Foster seems to have adopted the “madcap heiress” of 1930s Hollywood comedies as a role model. In her first posting, Ceylon, Foster adopted a baby chipmunk, which she raised, named Christopher and took to carrying around in her pocket. The animal’s many escapes and Foster’s subsequent pursuits led to absurd scandals, such as the time Foster crawled under a table to look for the rodent and ran her hand up a general’s pant leg. Charged with Morale Operations (propaganda), Foster devised a notorious operation in which hundreds of condoms were stuffed with anti-Japanese tracts and malaria medication then released by passing submarines off the coasts of Malaysia and Indonesia. She ran local agents and helped devise bogus news reports that mimicked Japanese broadcasts but were subtly tweaked to offend the native population of enemy-occupied territory.

Foster’s duties resembled those of a CIA case officer, although the CIA did not yet exist; Julia, on the other hand, ran the OSS camp’s “nerve center,” compiling the research that came in from the field and dispatching it to Washington and the field operations that needed it. Arguably, Julia’s was the more important job (she had a higher security clearance), but Foster’s was the more thrilling. And while the levelheaded, famously discreet Julia spent her time in the CBI (China-Burma-India) theater pining over Paul Child, who would not realize how perfectly suited they were to each other until after the war, Foster had tragic affairs, got into countless comical scrapes and saw much more of the conflict firsthand.

Things began to go wrong for Foster after the war, when she was sent to Indonesia and Vietnam to help supervise the liberation of POWs and otherwise keep an eye on things. The U.S. was so focused on rebuilding Europe that it was willing to sacrifice many Asian allies who had expected to be granted independence as a reward for helping to defeat the Japanese. Instead, the old, hated, European colonial powers began to reestablish their hold, unimpeded by the Americans. This outraged Foster, who witnessed atrocities and other injustices committed by Dutch and French troops against Indonesian and Vietnamese civilians and believed the U.S was seriously undermining its own interests. She wrote a blistering white paper condemning American policy in Indonesia (it was ignored) and quit her government job to head back to the States.

Meanwhile, after weathering a rough-and-ready posting in Chungking (“It’s dirty beyond belief, utterly inconvenient, full of disease, misery, corruption and mystery,” Paul Child wrote to his twin brother, “but I love it.”), the Childs finally concluded their long courtship. He went to work for the United States Information Service in Paris and she decided to learn to cook. They would not reconnect with Foster until 1952, when they discovered that she, too, was living in Paris, working as a painter under the name Madame Zlatovski. (She had married — or rather, remarried, since it turned out she’d been secretly married to a Russian immigrant throughout the war.) They found her, in Paul’s words, “just as lazy, hazy, impractical and loveable as she was seven years ago.”

The happiness of that reunion was short-lived. Foster and her husband were soon embroiled in the Red Scare, and Paul Child himself was briefly and scarily caught up in the slipstream of her troubles. “A Covert Affair” is a skillfully told tale of espionage, combining just enough background information with the right amount of boisterous anecdote to make the reader feel simultaneously amused and informed. For the early parts of the book, Conant leans heavily on Foster’s own memoirs, as well as Paul Child’s marvelous letters home. But when she gets to Foster’s indictment by a federal grand jury on charges of espionage for the Soviet Union, she has to pick her way across far more uncertain ground. She does so with aplomb.

Was Foster a Soviet spy or a victim of overzealous anti-Communist crusaders who were far too willing to believe the testimony of a showboating informer who also happened to be a proven plagiarist and con man? Without relinquishing her fundamental sympathy with Foster, Conant faults her subject for “her denial and her self-delusion” as well as her refusal “to confront the truth about herself at the most fundamental level.”

The larkish first half of “A Covert Affair” gives way to a much darker but more intriguing consideration of how personality becomes destiny; the very qualities that make Foster so much fun to read about also led to her downfall. The Childs are relegated to the sidelines in this final act, but it hardly matters; by that point, Foster is the one you really care about. Her considerable talents went to waste after the war, mostly because she insisted on saying things about Southeast Asia that the officials back home just didn’t want to hear. No surprise, they all turned out to be true.

Continue Reading Close
Laura Miller

Laura Miller is a senior writer for Salon. She is the author of "The Magician's Book: A Skeptic's Adventures in Narnia" and has a Web site, magiciansbook.com.

Tiny spy planes mimic birds and insects

Researchers are working on nature-inspired drones to help rescue people during disasters and, yes, also to spy

  • more
    • All Share Services

You’ll never look at hummingbirds the same again.

The Pentagon has poured millions of dollars into the development of tiny drones inspired by biology, each equipped with video and audio equipment that can record sights and sounds.

They could be used to spy, but also to locate people inside earthquake-crumpled buildings and detect hazardous chemical leaks.

The smaller, the better.

Besides the hummingbird, engineers in the growing unmanned aircraft industry are working on drones that look like insects and the helicopter-like maple leaf seed.

Researchers are even exploring ways to implant surveillance and other equipment into an insect as it is undergoing metamorphosis. They want to be able to control the creature.

The devices could end up being used by police officers and firefighters.

Their potential use outside of battle zones, however, is raising questions about privacy and the dangers of the winged creatures buzzing around in the same skies as aircraft.

For now, most of these devices are just inspiring awe.

With a 6.5-inch wing span, the remote-controlled bird weighs less than a AA battery and can fly at speeds of up to 11 mph, propelled only by the flapping of its two wings. A tiny video camera sits in its belly.

The bird can climb and descend vertically, fly sideways, forward and backward. It can rotate clockwise and counterclockwise.

Most of all it can hover and perch on a window ledge while it gathers intelligence, unbeknownst to the enemy.

“We were almost laughing out of being scared because we had signed up to do this,” said Matt Keennon, senior project engineer of California’s AeroVironment, which built the hummingbird.

The Pentagon asked them to develop a pocket-sized aircraft for surveillance and reconnaissance that mimicked biology. It could be anything, they said, from a dragonfly to a hummingbird.

Five years and $4 million later, the company has developed what it calls the world’s first hummingbird spy plane.

“It was very daunting up front and remained that way for quite some time into the project,” he said, after the drone blew by his head and landed on his hand during a media demonstration.

The toughest challenges were building a tiny vehicle that can fly for a prolonged period and be controlled or control itself.

AeroVironment has a history of developing such aircraft.

Over the decades, the Monrovia, Calif.-based company has developed everything from a flying mechanical reptile to a hydrogen-powered plane capable of flying in the stratosphere and surveying an area larger than Afghanistan at one glance.

It has become a leader in the hand-launched drone industry.

Troops fling a four-pound plane, called the Raven, into the air. They have come to rely on the real-time video it sends back, using it to locate roadside bombs or get a glimpse of what is happening over the next hill or around a corner.

The success of the hummingbird drone, however, “paves the way for a new generation of aircraft with the agility and appearance of small birds,” said Todd Hylton of the Pentagon’s research arm, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

These drones are not just birds.

Lockheed Martin has developed a fake maple leaf seed, or so-called whirly bird, loaded with navigation equipment and imaging sensors. The spy plane weighs .07 ounces.

On the far end of the research spectrum, DARPA is also exploring the possibility of implanting live insects during metamorphosis with video cameras or sensors and controlling them by applying electrical stimulation to their wings.

The idea is for the military to be able to send in a swarm of bugs loaded with spy gear.

The military is also eyeing other uses.

The drones could be sent in to search buildings in urban combat zones. Police are interested in using them, among other things, to detect a hazardous chemical leak. Firefighters could fling them out over a disaster to get better data, quickly.

It is hard to tell what, if anything, will make it out of the lab, but their emergence presents challenges and not just with physics.

What are the legal implications, especially with interest among police in using tiny drones for surveillance, and their potential to invade people’s privacy, asks Peter W. Singer, author of the book, “Wired for War” about robotic warfare.

Singer said these questions will be increasingly discussed as robotics become a greater part of everyday life.

“It’s the equivalent to the advent of the printing press, the computer, gun powder,” he said. “It’s that scale of change.”

 

Continue Reading Close

White House denies WikiLeaks’ spying charges

Assertions that Secretary Clinton ordered her diplomats to engage in espionage is "ridiculous," says Robert Gibbs

  • more
    • All Share Services

President Barack Obama’s spokesman is labeling as “ridiculous” an assertion by the founder of WikiLeaks that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton should resign if she was involved in asking U.S. diplomats to gather intelligence at the United Nations.

In an online interview with Time magazine from an undisclosed location, founder Julian Assange on Tuesday called on Clinton to resign “if it can be shown that she was responsible for ordering U.S. diplomatic figures to engage in espionage in the United Nations” in violation of international agreements.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Wednesday that Assange’s statements “are both ridiculous and absurd.” Clinton, he said, has done nothing wrong, and U.S. diplomats do not engage in spying. He spoke in an interview on NBC’s “Today” show.

State Department officials said Tuesday that secret instructions to American diplomats to gather sensitive personal information about foreign leaders originated from the U.S. intelligence community but did not require diplomats to spy. Requests for DNA and biometric data on foreign officials were contained in leaked classified cables published by WikiLeaks.

“Secretary Clinton is doing a great job,” Gibbs said. “The president has great confidence in and admires the work that Secretary Clinton has done.”

Continue Reading Close

How to catch a Taliban impostor

If Afghan officials don't want to be fooled by another huckster, they should take a close look at these movies

  • more
    • All Share Services

How to catch a Taliban impostorHamid Karzai (left) and the ladies of "Sex and the City 2"

Today the New York Times reports that a still-unidentified Afghan man was posing as a Taliban leader in secret peace talks with Afghanistan officials. It’s unclear whether this individual was a con man out to line his pockets, a Taliban agent out to sabotage the talks, or a plant from Pakistani intelligence. The writers, Dexter Filkins and Carlotta Gall, note that the incident “could have been lifted from a spy novel.” Regrettably, they may be right. The days when writers of espionage fiction conceived of impostor spies who called themselves Julian or Raoul seem to have passed in favor of writers who are less interested in the glamour of international intrigue than in impostors who don’t drink and call themselves Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansour.

Further reports on the story are sure to observe that the entire episode might have been plucked from the movies. This is incorrect. Plucked from films, yes. The story is half-ready for the art house. Strip the tale of glamour, remove any potential for excitement and you’ve not only got a greenlight, but guaranteed analysis in Cineaste, and a panel accompanying the New York opening consisting of Naomi Klein, a New York University expert on the Middle East, and any film critic dextrous enough to use “hegemony” in a sentence.

But the movies? Forget it. Hollywood is too besotted with sequels, reboots, animation to stick a toe into the real world. And the supposed change from this routine that the holiday season offers consists usually of adaptations of the kind of novels (usually Booker winners) that are purchased instead of read, or a Nancy Myers comedy in which a 50-ish divorcee (Meryl/Goldie/Diane) who has founded her own successful wrapping-paper company has to decide if her heart lies with her younger lesbian business partner (Debra Messing) or with a rakish older European diplomat (Bernard-Henri Levy).

Opportunities for film viewing in Kabul are understandably sparse. Salon’s sources in the city report that there are only two screens in operation at the city’s sixplex and they are currently offering “Speed Racer” and “Lambada: The Forbidden Dance.” Clearly, it’s time for America to intervene. Despite our massive expenditures in the country, our officials can surely afford a selection of DVDs designed to train Afghan officials on not falling for an impostor.

We suggest:

“Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?” (1967) — We direct Afghan leaders to the suspicion shown by Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn in the early part of the film toward the doctor their daughter brings home as her fiancé. The audience may consider their fears unreasonable because the doctor is, after all, Sidney Poitier and the young woman could as easily have brought home Eldridge Cleaver or Sonny Liston. But had the Afghans treated the impostor’s moderate proposals with even a smidge of the skepticism Spence and Kate show toward even such a paragon as Poitier, surely this embarrassing situation might have been avoided.

“Brokeback Mountain” (2005) — Was this individual really in close contact with the Taliban? If he had, he surely would have shown some inclination to the rugged, and all too often lonely, life that solitary figures like insurgents or closeted gay cowboys lead. Simply the mention of certain items — Ralph Lauren flannel shirts; beef jerky; a pet mule named Faiza — would have elicited a certain gleam in the eye of the real McCoy.

“Footloose” (1984) — Certainly only as dedicated a zealot as an actual Taliban leader could resist the combined lure of Kevin Bacon’s dancing and Kenny Loggins’ music. Slip the movie on during a break in negotations. Does this alleged mullah tap his feet, or nod his head sternly during John Lithgow’s fire-and-brimstone sermons? For the sake of the money you’ve just shelled out, pray it’s the latter.

“The Passion of the Christ” (2004) Four words: It’s the Jews’ fault. Sure to warm the heart of any true jihadist.

“Sex and the City 2″ (2010): Watch your man as he watches Carrie and the girls live it up in Abu Dhabi. Does he chuckle at their antics or make proclamations about profanations of the infidel harlots? (Note: The film can also be useful for other methods of recognition. See: “Brokeback Mountain.”)

Charles Taylor is a writer in New York.

Continue Reading Close

Charles Taylor is a columnist for the Newark Star-Ledger.

Page 1 of 32 in Espionage