- WASHINGTON -- They claim
to be the spies who were left out in the cold by their handlers at the
CIA. And now they're fighting back.
-
- Going by the pseudonyms of John Doe and his wife Jane,
a pair of onetime defectors from a former Soviet bloc nation took their
case to the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday in an effort to force the CIA
to pay them the lifetime compensation they say they were promised years
ago.
-
- It's a story worthy of a Cold War spy novel by John le
Carre or Len Deighton, full of alleged coercion by the Central Intelligence
Agency that led to a stint of espionage on behalf of the Americans and
resettlement of the spies under new identities in the United States.
-
- Years later, the "Does" assert they were left
in the lurch by their CIA handlers when Mr. Doe lost his job at a bank
and the couple needed cash to survive.
-
- The CIA wrote him back that they appreciated his service
but that "budget constraints" precluded any more payments.
-
- As for the CIA, it doesn't want to talk about the case,
arguing that a Supreme Court ruling dating from a Civil War espionage case
automatically bans the courts from hearing lawsuits over alleged espionage
contracts.
-
- In that case, the estate of William A. Lloyd sought to
recover compensation for spying he had done behind Confederate lines on
behalf of President Abraham Lincoln in 1861. The court threw the case out,
saying the nature of the contract was secret for national-security purposes.
-
- "Both employer and agent must have understood that
the lips of the other were to be forever sealed respecting the relation
of either to the matter."
-
- That same principle still exists, the government argues.
-
- "There's something about an espionage relationship
that you understand you have no protected status under the law," acting
U.S. Solicitor-General Paul Clement told the court yesterday.
-
- But the lawyer for the Does, David Burman, said the case
is not about state secrets but about whether the executive branch of the
U.S. government has the right to renege on a contractual arrangement.
-
- According to Mr. Doe's brief in the case, he was "a
high-ranking diplomat" for a country considered an enemy of the United
States during the Cold War.
-
- He and his wife were posted to a third country, where
they approached a U.S. official and asked to defect.
-
- CIA agents then got involved and held the couple for
12 hours, allegedly using "intimidation and coercion" to turn
them into spies, after which they were promised a haven in the United States.
-
- The Does say they reluctantly agreed to become spies
and eventually were brought to the United States, where they were given
new identities and false backgrounds.
-
- The Does were provided with housing, health care and
an annual stipend reported to have started at $20,000 (U.S.) a year and
peaked at $27,000.
-
- Then Mr. Doe found a job at a bank and the payments began
shrinking and finally disappeared.
-
- In 1997, after a bank merger, Mr. Doe lost his job and
went back to the CIA seeking resumption of the payments but was told there
was no money in the espionage kitty for him.
-
- Unable to find a job and attempting to cut his losses,
Mr. Doe and his wife went back to their home country in the Eastern Bloc,
but returned to the United States when they realized that they could face
imprisonment or even the death penalty if their old spying activities were
discovered.
-
- They sued the CIA in 2000 and were successful in the
lower courts, but the CIA appealed.
-
- Wesley Wark, a historian and espionage expert at the
University of Toronto, said in an interview that resettlement issues related
to former spies have always been a major challenge for intelligence services.
-
- Prof. Wark said many of these spies' lives have been
distorted by the clandestine work they have done, and they place a very
high value on themselves to their masters, even when that value has declined.
-
- Canada's most famous spy, the Soviet defector Igor Gouzenko,
had huge conflicts with his handlers over the years, Prof. Wark said.
-
- "Igor Gouzenko was an absolute nightmare for the
RCMP" as he made repeated demands for more money, more protection
and more gratitude once he had been given a new identity after his post-Second-World-War
defection.
-
- Because nothing is written down in these arrangements,
the personal relationship between the spy and his or her handler is essential.
Prof. Wark suggested that in the case of the Does, their handlers have
probably long since retired or even died, "so they have nobody to
go to bat for them.
-
- "I'm sure the case is unprecedented and I'm sure
the CIA dislikes the publicity," he said.
-
- Richard Aldrich, an espionage expert at the University
of Nottingham in Britain, said that defectors have a notoriously short
shelf life for the intelligence services that give them a haven.
-
- "Defectors are typically one-shot operations and
their value declines very rapidly," but the only way to persuade people
to defect is to promise to take care of them for the rest of their lives.
-
- "It's actually very difficult to resettle someone
from an Eastern bloc country inside Britain or the United States or Canada,"
he said. "All of them have a great difficulty adjusting to a free
society."
-
- But Prof. Aldrich said that he doesn't see any problem
for U.S. national security if the couple's case is allowed to proceed,
noting that a considerable amount of the information on the CIA's Cold
War operations is already in the public domain.
-
- A ruling by the court is expected in June.
-
- © Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc.
All Rights Reserved.
-
- http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
|
