Ben Macintyre’s “The Spy and the Traitor”

______________________

I don’t read – and other than John Le Carre – am not interested in spy novels, or their history. Boring stuff although it’s important to try to keep some tabs upon. But I did enjoy this book which I would classify as well written, high quality gray propaganda.  Intellectually tantalizing I do admit. It did get me thinking about the spy mania of the 1980s – and it has all evolved in a dangerous way (Palantir and all that) more recently.

Just finished reading The Spy and The Traitor by Ben Macintyre, the story of KGB spy Oleg Gordievsky who changed sides, worked for M-16 – British Intelligence – and who was found dead at his London home earlier this year (2025). Frankly what drew me to reading it was the John Le Carre blurb on the cover “The best true spy novel I have ever read.” If John Le Carre recommends it, how could I not read it.

My main thought after finishing the book – found in a “Little Library” in our neighborhood of Northwest Denver – is the utter stupidity and uselessness of Cold War espionage, how much human creativity, brilliance, financial energy actually went into both sides of the Cold War spying on each other and how little such activities actually produced for the common good in either country or the world.

Furthermore on some level books like this which attempt to argue of the importance and intelligence and spying are nothing other than pretexts for increased military spending at this point.

I don’t read – and other than John Le Carre – am not interested in spy novels, or their history. Boring stuff although it’s important to try to keep some tabs upon. But I did enjoy this book which I would classify as well written, high quality gray propaganda. Although skewed – as such works almost always are – there are insights and occasional historical nuggets as well, all of which are hard to filter out and get to the bottom of. Intellectually tantalizing I do admit. It did get me thinking about the spy mania of the 1980s – and it has all evolved in a dangerous way (Palantir and all that) more recently.

The suggestion – the whole argument of the book: Gordievsky did what he did “out of principle” – ie, those who spy for the West are “good guys”, those who spy for the Soviet Union (and now Russia) are evil greedy types. More than a bit simplistic. The book contrasts Gordievsky’s spying (supposedly for “principled” reasons – his contempt for Soviet society – with that of U.S. C.I.A. spy Aldrich Ames vegetating for life in an Indiana prison. No doubt Ames was little more than a greedy skunk who earned more than $4 million turning over U.S. intelligence secrets to the Soviets and whose revelations made many heads rolls; Gordievsky’s was very nearly one of the.

Anyhow, main thought after finishing the book – found in a “Little Library” in our neighborhood of Northwest Denver – is the utter stupidity of Cold War espionage, how much human creativity, brilliance, financial energy actually went into both sides of the Cold War spying on each other and how little such activities actually produced for the common good in either country.

Just a bunch of sick fucking paranoids, my own sense being that the information gleaned – as in the case of Gordievsky – did little or nothing to affect the flow of history. That Gordievsky’s revelations had much to do with the end of the Cold War – and the U.S. Soviet steps a way from nuclear war (which justifies all this) is nonsense from where I’m sitting.

John Carre understood that neither side had a monopoly on principle, goodness and that in the end both the C.I.A. and K.G.B. (throw in here Mossad, M-16) are mirror images of one another. Just a bunch of  mafias hiding under to the umbrella of patriotism. That Alrich Ames is little more than greedy unprincipled sort is true enough. Despite Macintyre’s white wash, Oleg Gordievsky was no better. Still, the book is worth the read. Ah and if you don’t want to take the time to read the book the NY Times obituary of Gordievsky is a decent summary of its content (and I suspect, the source of the article).