Servicile speciale engleze MI-5 au decis sa contraatace. Prea multele si insistentele scormoneli ale spionilor rusi in perimetrul englez i-au convins pe sefii MI-5 sa decida reinfiintarea serviciului informational specializat cu contracararea spionajului rus si al altor tari din Estul Europei. E pentru prima oara cand ia fiinta un asemenea serviciu dupa incheierea “Razboiului Rece”, in urma cu aproape 20 de ani. Jonathan Evans, seful MI-5, (50 de ani), care a inlocuit-o, la 21 aprilie 2007, pe “Doamna M”, Eliza Manningham-Buller, din fruntea serviciului de contraspionaj britanic, se plange ca in ultimul an a fost detectata o activitate febrila a anumitor servicii – si in special ale Rusiei, Chinei si ale altor state din Est -, de a spiona in Anglia. Cel putin 20 de servicii secrete straine activeaza actualmente in Anglia, atentand la interesele britanice. Foarte activi sunt spionii rusi, numarul lor s-a marit considerabil, fiind cel putin egal cu numarul spionilor care actionau in Anglia in “epoca sovietica”. In lumina relatiilor speciale existente astazi intre Anglia si Uniunea Europeana cu Rusia, aceasta activitate abundenta de spionaj pare cel putin bizara, spune responsabilul englez. (ZIUA/Tesu SOLOMOVICI)
Pe aceeasi tema
Biblioteca de Intelligence
“Servicii secrete straine – retrospectiva si actualitate. Interferente in spatiul romanesc”
V-ati intrebat vreodata ce au facut SRI si SIE impreuna cu factorul politic in ultimii 18 ani privind spionii anti-Romania, unii dintre ei activi chiar la varful Guvernului si a Administratiei Prezidentiale? Raspunsul vi-l da jurnalistul Mihai Munteanu in EvZ de astazi: au frecat-o! De cele mai multe ori impreuna cu spionii si agentii de influenta ai unor puteri straini. Ce le-a mai ramas bietilor ofiteri de informatii care si-au nenorocit zilele si noptile pe urmele lor? Sa apeleze la presa. Asta cand se poate. Ca de multe ori si, in special, in ultima perioada, nici asta nu se mai poate…
Reţeaua „IUDA“: spionii lui Ivan de Mihai Munteanu Luni, 23 Iunie 2008 Culisele tranzacţiilor cu armament dezvăluie anvergura operaţiunilor ruseşti din România. Un raport al Direcţiei de Siguranţă Militară de la Bucureşti (DSM – contraspionajul militar) pune în lumină modul în care serviciile secrete de la Moscova penetrează informativ industria naţională de apărare. Miza: controlul operaţiunilor de import-export, cu potenţial financiar uriaş, şi informaţii „preţioase“ privind strategia de apărare a guvernului român. Filajul DSM identifică un personaj-cheie: Aurel Cazacu (foto). Nume de cod: „Iuda“. Nume real: Aurel Cazacu. Funcţia: şeful Direcţiei Generale Industria de Apărare din Ministerul Economiei, prin care se coordonează Romarm, producătorul naţional de armament. Aurel Cazacu a fost luat în obiectivul Direcţiei de Siguranţă Militară (DSM) – serviciul de contraspionaj al Direcţiei Generale de Informaţii a Armatei. EVZ a obţinut câteva dintre rapoartele DSM. Analiştii identifică, pas cu pas, interesele ruseşti din jurul Romtehnica – traderul de armament al Ministerului Apărării. Avertismentul DSM nu se referă doar la riscul contrabandei cu arme româneşti, ci şi la spionajul economic al Kremlinului. Sub guvernarea PSD, Cazacu a fost directorul Romtehnica. Acum, e monitorizat din cauza „deserviciilor“ aduse prin legăturile sale cu ofiţeri de informaţii ruşi, israelieni şi americani. Aceştia penetrează informativ zona producţiei şi comerţului românesc cu armament, sub paravanul reprezentării unor corporaţii străine din domeniu. Aurel Cazacu are o filosofie proprie: „Cât am fost la Romtehnica, m-am luptat ca aceasta să fie prima. Acum, la Romarm, mă lupt pentru Romarm“. Vorbeşte mult, dar ocoleşte subiectul principal cu dexteritate şi crede că în spatele ziariştilor se ascund „alte interese“. Recunoaşte, însă, tot ce scrie în rapoartele DSM, dar pretinde o copie. Cum nu i se oferă, condiţionează: „S-ar putea să-mi aduc aminte mai multe, dacă am şi eu o copie“. În rest, vine cu justificări: „Ei vor să vândă, nu să producă, iar eu am tot interesul să-i ţin aici ca să producă. Trebuie ajutaţi, investiţiile trebuie sprijinite“. „Reţeaua IUDA: Spionii lui Ivan“ este prima radiografie a spionilor din culisele afacerii cu tehnică specială. UMBRELA ARMITECH Filieră rusească via Panama Reţeaua „IUDA“: spionii lui Ivan [2008-06-23]Culisele tranzacţiilor cu armament dezvăluie anvergura operaţiunilor ruseşti din România. … [citeste]
Mihai Munteanu EvZ, Luni, 19 Mai 2008 Foşti agenţi din serviciile secrete ruse, bulgare şi israeliene, cu conexiuni la Bucureşti, furnizează cărbune energetic pentru termocentralele româneşti la preţuri umflate de aproape două ori – adaos pe care-l suportăm toţi din buzunar. Sistemul Energetic Naţional a importat huilă rusească prin intermediarii Boris Golovin (colonel în rezervă în spionajul militar rusesc), Tonya Halpern (aflată în atenţia contraspionajului militar românesc) şi foştii KGB-işti Constantin Iavorsky, Anatoli Patron şi Iuri Ustinov. Furnizările de materie primă în Sistemul Energetic Naţional au fost monopolizate de foşti spioni sovietici, aliaţi în afaceri cu un om familiar agenţiilor de informaţii israeliene. Mai nou, un proiect de două miliarde de euro, dezvoltat la Galaţi, poartă amprenta spionajului rusesc.
Boris Golovin. A fost colonel în trupele Spetnatz – GRU – serviciul de spionaj al armatei ruse. Reprezintă în România interesele lui Oleg Deripaska şi Igor Ziuzin, doi oligarhi ruşi, parteneri ai evazionistului mondial Mark Rich (Nota mea: fost sponsor al lui Mihai Razvan Ungureanu).
Tonya Halpern. Un raport al Direcţiei de Siguranţă Militară (contraspionaj) obţinut de EVZ indică apartenenţa ei la serviciile secrete israeliene. Sursele EVZ susţin că este ofiţer AMAN – spionajul militar din Ţara Sfântă. Importă cărbune în România prin offshore-ul ei din Cipru, Petlon Enterprises Ltd.
Constantin Iavorsky. Fost general KGB, a monopolizat livrările de cărbune pentru termocentralele româneşti. S-a înconjurat în afaceri de o armată de ofiţeri SRI.
Igor Ziuzin. Oligarh rus, controlează gigantul Mechel, furnizorul cărbunelui ars de CETurile româneşti. Ziuzin deţine şi combinatele siderurgice de la Târgovişte şi Câmpia Turzii.
COMENTARII ECONOMICE SI POLITICE Vladimir Tismaneanu in dialog cu Ion Iliescu (VLADIMIR TISMANEANU) Luni, 5 aprilie, la Facultatea de Drept a avut loc lansarea cartii Marele soc. Din finalul unui secol scurt, un dialog intre politologul Vladimir Tismaneanu si presedintele Ion Iliescu, volum aparut la Editura Enciclopedica. In deschidere, Ioan Mihailescu, rectorul Universitatii Bucuresti, a salutat aparitia acestei carti, care reprezinta nu numai o referinta memorialistica foarte atractiva pentru cititori, dar si o sursa de documentare pentru istorici; in opinia lui Ioan Scurtu, directorul Institutului de Istorie “Nicolae Iorga”, cartea reprezinta una dintre cele mai lucide analize asupra perioadei comuniste. Cristian Preda, decanul Facultatii de Stiinte Politice din cadrul Universitatii Bucuresti, a subliniat importanta volumului ca prima biografie politica a presedintelui Iliescu. Cartea reprezinta, in opinia sa, o discutie extrem de interesanta pentru intelegerea Partidului Comunist ca forta politica. O alta latura importanta a cartii, analizata de Cristian Preda, a fost relatia dintre Securitate si Partidul Comunist, in care aparatul de opresiune este vazut ca un instrument, si nu ca principalul vinovat. Vladimir Tismaneanu a declarat ca, in ciuda opiniilor politice diferite, domnia sa nu s-a considerat niciodata un adversar personal al lui Ion Iliescu, care este “un om al stangii democrate”. Profesorul Tismaneanu a urmarit tranzitia omului si intelectualului Iliescu, in cadrul dialogului explorand etapele de invatare politica ale presedintelui. “Pe parcursul ultimilor 15 ani, Ion Iliescu a devenit o personalitate de varf a procesului democratic din Romania”, a declarat Vladimir Tismaneanu. Ca politolog, profesorul Tismaneanu a fost interesat de transformarea unui politician marxist intr-un ganditor modern, dispus sa recunoasca falimentul utopiei. Domnia sa a incheiat spunand ca dialogul cu Ion Iliescu a fost o “placere intelectuala”. Ion Iliescu a spus ca dialogul din carte s-a concentrat pe tema prabusirii sistemului comunist, trecand prin istoria comunismului, in general, si a comunismului romanesc, in special. “Comunismul nu a fost un accident in istoria umanitatii, ci are un fundament obiectiv”, a declarat Ion Iliescu. Un alt moment discutat in carte este legat de evenimentele din 13-15 iunie 1990, asupra carora cei doi interlocutori au avut pareri diferite. Presedintele Iliescu a reafirmat convingerea ca venirea minerilor in Bucuresti a reprezentat o reactie sociala la amenintarea cu haosul care domnea in acele zile. Ion Iliescu a recunoscut ca, pentru un moment, a ezitat sa accepte acest dialog, dar ca acum nu regreta ca a luat parte la acest proiect. (R.B.)
Revista “22”, organul GDS ANUL XIV (736) (13 aprilie – 19 aprilie 2004)
In conferinta extraordinara de presa de azi, reprezentantii organizatorilor Fenomenului Piata Universitatii 1989-1990 si ai victimelor mineriadelor au facut apel la presedintele Traian Basescu pentru revocarea din functie a generalului penal Dan Voinea si trecerea pe rol a Dosarelor Revolutiei si Mineriadelor pentru pedepsirea vinovatilor, fie si dupa 18 ani.
Dan Voinea, 18 ani de minciuna
Dan Voinea, musamalizatorul
Dan Voinea, generalul-infractor
Dan Voinea, membru al conspiratiei din decembrie 1989
AFLAT IN COMPLETUL DE “JUDECATA” AL SOTILOR CEA– USESCU
Poate cea mai importanta stire legata de Adunarea Generala a Clubului Roman de Presa (CRP) de ieri (cand s-a schimbat, provizoriu, conducerea – vezi https://calincosmaciuc.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/indira-for-president/) este ca s-a hotarat si includerea in CRP a societatilor Satiricon si Media Promovalores. Satiricon editeaza publicatiile Dilema Veche, Dilemateca si Romania Literara si este parte a Grupului Rompetrol-KazMunaiGaz. Cu alte cuvinte, pentru cine nu stia, distinstii Andrei Plesu si Nicolae Manolescu sunt angajatii oligarhului Dinu Patriciu beneficiind direct de petro-rublele de la Kremlin virate prin Kazakhstan. Si nu numai ei sunt pe statul de plata bifat la Moscova. De cand Adevarul editeaza si Foreign Policy Romania, si urmatorii membri ai Consiliului Editorial FPR sunt slujbasii lui Patriciu (unul dintre ei, vip de stat): Adrian Severin, Magdalena Boiangiu, Petre Roman, Ovidiu Nahoi, Mihai Razvan Ungureanu, Vasile Puscas si, cu voia dvs, ultimul pe lista, Andrei Plesu.
Cine o sa se oboseasca sa ia primul numar al FP la rasfoit o sa gaseasca acolo niste laude gratuite si siropoase din partea “viperinului de stat” la adresa “importantei tranzactii” care a lasat Romania fara Rompetrol si “ponderea extraordinara a acestor succese pentru imaginea noastra pe plan extern”.
Daca Sarkozy are placeri la bratari (vezi foto mai jos), prim-vicepremierul Rusiei, general-locotenent in informatii Serghei Ivanov, are alte preferinte: un ac de cravata cu un Kalasnikov de aur, dupa cum a observat colega mea, AML. Foto: NATO.
“Jurnalul National” titreaza, vineri, 8 februarie: “Băsescu, omul Statelor Unite” intr-un articol scris de Gabi Golea (https://www.jurnalul.ro/articole/116424/basescu-omul-statelor-unite) ANALIZÅ ● Istoria unei campanii electorale “Un expert francez în serviciile de informaţii americane susţine, într-un interviu publicat vineri, 1 februarie, de ziarul Izvestia, că Traian Băsescu a fost candidatul sprijinit de SUA în alegerile prezidenţiale din 2004”. Misto! Expertul e Catherine Durandin. Am gasit articolul original prin amabilitatea colegei mele – a mai mica – si cu putin ajutor l-am trecut printr-un program de traducere automata. Il prezint asa, in forma nefinisata, pentru cine e interesat. Atentie pe preotii ortodocsi si pe studenti!
The expert{auditeur} on American special services Katrin Dyuranden:
“Gorbachev was afraid to speak seriously with Bush about Germany “
by Oleg Shevtsov What is CIA – the tool of imperial politics or the effective mechanism in struggle for freedom of democracy? Êàòðèí Äþðàíäåí, the professor of the Parisian Institute of the international and strategic researches and the author of the sensational books ” Bush’s Dynasty “, ” CIA on war ” and ” CIA – five years in anger “, slightly opens secrets of the American special services, shares data known to it{her} on a hidden circumstance of “velvet” revolutions. With it{her} the Parisian correspondent of “News” Oleg Shevtsov talked. Question: Why CIA has appeared in deep crisis, having missed on September, 11th? The answer: All fault have assigned to investigation and Georges Teneta as its{her} director. However Georges Bush’s administration has not lead then personnel cleanings. In fact the top of CIA has agreed to divide{undresse} with the White house the responsibility for preparation and the beginning of operation in Iraq. The basic arguments in favour of intervention – the information on presence at Saddam Hussein of the weapon of mass destruction and data on presence “Àëü-Êàèäû” in Iraq – with a serious stretch have been included by CIA in the report to the congress. But it was soon found out: the given data – “linden”. It became one more impact on reputation of CIA: many brilliant employees, first of all representatives of intellectual elite, have submitted to resignation. Q: But in fact CIA not for the first time tries to affect{influence} the decision of the country leaders, manipulating conclusions? A: That’s just the point, that CIA after September, 11th was completely under the control of administration. And under its{her} order has forged data, it is artificial forcing conditions around of Iraq and giving “terrible” arguments for the beginning military actions. As a result the report cost resignations to state secretary Colin Powell who at George Tenet’s stood at it{him} behind a back presence, has publicly declared{announced} presence in Iraq of the weapon of mass destruction. At Bush-younger the role of CIA has been shown to the decision of momentary problems{tasks}, and it any more does not conduct independent tracking of world{global} conditions. Q: In the work you use original documents of CIA from which the security classification is removed{taken off}… A: The matter is that earlier I studied{investigated} CIA in the historical plan. I could work in American ñïåöàðõèâàõ. Here I got acquainted with the file about operations of CIA of the last years. I have a solid set of documents which testify to application by employees of the American investigation in 1950th years of narcotic ËÑÄ and tortures at interrogations. And at last, me documents on preparation öýðýóøíèêàìè Gorbachev and Bush-senior meetings at the summit on Malta in 1989 have got. Q: Also what there was? A: Gorbachev met Bush by the military ship, and at this time there was a terrible storm. Now I have a full confidence, that your president was absolutely not ready to this summit. Cardinally important event for Soviet Union was discussed: association of Germany. Gorbachev should achieve, that it{she} became neutral. But it{he} has underestimated the partner on negotiations: Bush-senior and the chancellor of Germany Helmut Kohl have already agreed – the incorporated Germany will be included into NATO. This historical meeting prepared Ãîñäåïîì the USA and, naturally, investigation. The basic emphasis – on a theme of human rights. Infinite lists of persons{faces} which wished to leave the USSR there appeared, sat in camps. There was even a list of the Soviet brides, unsuccessfully tried to marry foreigners. And Bush spoke, insisted, pressed, not stopping. Yes so, that polite Gorbachev during any moment has not sustained: ” But you do not have monopoly for human rights! ” But it has not confused Bush, and it{he} continued to show these lists, not giving{allowing} the Soviet president and a mouth to open. The purpose – ” to not allow to start talking about a neutrality of Germans ” – it has been reached{achieved}. Q: Eventually Gorbachev has surrendered? A: it seems to Me, it{he} has begun to panic. On it, actually, also there was a calculation of CIA. In Moscow at that time, in the end of 1989, there was uneasy conditions for Gorbachev. And up to the final decision of a German question remains three weeks. And calculation ðàçâåäóïðàâëåíèÿ, secretary general who has well studied{investigated} character, was under construction that it{he} has been exhausted psychologically and it{he} simply will not have hardness to resist to pressure of the West. Most of all Gorbachev’s to act Francois Mitterand was surprised: it{he} has called back to Bush and has told, that the Soviet leader could not on such agree in any way. Q: But it is primary in Gorbachev’s intentions did not enter “to hand over” Germany? A: I have certificates: even leaders of the Western Europe did not expect, that events will develop so quickly. In my opinion, it is the tragical moment in history of the USSR. Q: you think, what it was possible to force to sign Bush any obligations from NATO? A: Probably. It is clear, why Russian consider{count}, that them then have deceived. In fact there was an oral arrangement to not place the weapon in territory of former GDR, however about it{her} at once have forgotten. Sharp expansion of NATO has provoked the subsequent collapse{landslide} to the east, ended crash of the Union. If all went more systematically instead of how have arranged the USA, painful{unhealthy} cataclysms in the East Europe would manage to be avoided. Q: In your books about CIA it is spoken about recruitment by Americans of priests in âîñòî÷íîåâðîïåéñêèõ the countries… A: I have learned{have found out} This information in 1992 from the interlocutor from the American embassy in Bucharest. It{he} has boasted, that during “democratization” of Romania the American special services operated{worked} through ïîëêîâûõ priests. Investigation had special programs for orthodox fathers in armies. Them instructed how correctly to adjust{set up} flock, to prevent ” blind obedience ” the soldier to unconstitutional orders. I have been amazed{struck}, how Americans have dexterously guessed to get into the closed environment of Armed forces ×àóøåñêó which then were formed on the basis of a compulsory military service. I do not have data about number of the enlisted{recruited} priests. But the idea has seemed to me extremely original. Q: When you have started to work with documents of CIA? A: It is connected with research work across Romania. Studying{investigating} a decline of dictator Chaushesku, I have collided{faced} with very strange facts. For example, Minister of Defence Mircha Pashku was trained in the USA in 1988. And the ambassador of Romania at the United Nations I met earlier in other quality – as the owner of the grant of one American centre of science. Me other members of the “democratic” Romanian government generated after overthrow of a mode have interested also all. It was found out, that the American proteges in it{him} – the majority. Q: That is the new political elite of Romania almost has not with its full complement passed{has not with its full complement taken place} special training in the USA? A: Well, maybe, not preparation, but with all from them contact in advance has been come into. And they received instructions is precisely. The policy{politics} of “openness” enabled the USA to form a ruling clique at own discretion. If to take Romania, Bulgaria, even Hungary and to look, that today’s ministers and leading politicians{policies; politics} till 1990th years you receive a curious picture did{made}. Someone has necessarily visited long business trip in the USA, someone has passed{has taken place} the American rates of management under special programs. It was competent work of investigation on selection of the necessary people in the East Europe. Not clearly, why the same is impossible to Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq. Q: Whom, in your opinion, CIA feels itself – as the tool of imperial politics or the fighter for freedom? A: For empire “solidity” in realization of the strategic purposes is characteristic. And in the USA it{this} is not present. There different lobbies, opposition, democrats… The Majority of people in CIA with which I communicated, is well ìîòèâèðîâàííûå professionals, for which national interests of the USA above all. Many really trust, that they release{exempt} people from tyranny and dictatorships. Those who feels itself “Ðýìáî”, playing secret wars and plots, least. But business also that problems{tasks} before investigation put financial circles and a military-industrial complex. Q: And secret currents inside of CIA are? A: Now inside of investigation there are the parallel structures which are carrying out the certain order. The most disturbing: in operations and special operations “experts{auditeurs}” from practically not private{individual} structures under control to executive authority are used. At deficiency of trust to the government, at absence of the clear purposes war it becomes frequent “dirty”. Bigwigs of the organized crime interfere With it{her}, íàðêîäåëüöû, dealers the weapon – as we see it both in Afghanistan, and in Kosovo. Q: What do you think of “color” revolutions in territory of the formerUSSR? It too firm ïîñòóïü democracies or the technique tested in the East Europe? A: As has shown the analysis of events of December, 2004 in Romania, export of revolution can be successful only when there is an internal demand. Change of president Iliesku with the American candidate -Traian Basescu, has passed{has taken place} on hurrah. Those parties{sets}, groups, student’s movements which advanced it{him}, really leaned{based} on the USA. Áýñåñêó till now it is popular in Romania. Yes, really, all Americans have organized. Financing because of ocean went mainly on the organization of student’s demonstrations. I not so well know a situation in Ukraine and in Georgia, but imposing “help” from the outside is usual gives{allows} result if there are objective preconditions. And if they are not present….
the script varies – and the result can be unexpected.
WASHINGTON, Feb 5 (Reuters) – The United States is worried that Russia, China and OPEC oil-producing countries could use their growing financial clout to advance political goals, the top U.S. spy chief told Congress on Tuesday.
Such economic matters joined terrorism, nuclear proliferation and computer-network vulnerabilities as top U.S. security threats described by National Director of Intelligence Michael McConnell (center) in an annual assessment.
McConnell said U.S. intelligence agencies had “concerns about the financial capabilities of Russia, China and OPEC countries and the potential use of their market access to exert financial leverage to political ends.”Russia, bolstered in part by oil revenues, was positioning itself to control an energy supply and transportation network from Europe to East Asia, and the Russian military had begun to reverse a long decline, he told the Senate Intelligence Committee.China has pursued a policy of global engagement out of a desire to expand its growing economy and obtain access markets, resources, technology and expertise, McConnell said.It seeks a constructive relationship with the United States and other countries, but as its influence grows “Beijing probably will increasingly expect its interests to be respected by other countries,” he said.
Russia and China have long been able to target U.S. computer systems to collect intelligence, he said. “The worrisome part is, today, they also could target information infrastructure systems for degradation or destruction.”In the energy sector, a weak U.S. dollar had prompted some oil suppliers, including Iran, Syria and Libya, to ask for payment in other currencies, or to delink their currencies from the dollar, McConnell said. “Continued concerns about dollar depreciation could tempt other producers to follow suit.”
Gasiti aici Raportul plin de date importante pentru Romania:
Ceea ce scrie ZIUA si subsemnatul 🙂 de cativa ani buni, inclusiv in ce priveste scurgerile de info de la NATO la Moscova, adevereste azi presa occidentala de varf, respectiv IHT. Dar ceea ce nu au luat in calcul inca este ca Ucraina urmeaza sa fie viitorul magar troian al KGB/GRU in NATO.
Chiar astazi, cand se semneaza la Viena un nou contract pentru Nabucco, iata cu Ungaria a anuntat ca este interesata (normal) in South Stream – “conducta aurie” a lui Putin.
Mai jos, nota ZIUA si articolul original din IHT.
Credibilitatea Bulgariei si Ungariei in NATO a inceput sa fie pusa la indoiala, informeaza presa occidentala. Dupa semnarea unui tratat cu Rusia care saboteaza proiectul UE al gazoductului Nabucco, Bulgaria a fost acuzata ca transmite rusilor secrete NATO. “Pot pune pariu ca orice am impartasit cu bulgarii in cadrul NATO s-a dus direct la Moscova”, a declarat pentru New York Times un oficial NATO care a preferat sa-si pastreze anonimatul. Pe de alta parte, noul sef al serviciilor secrete ungare, care a fost instruit timp de sase ani la Academia KGB din Moscova, a devenit director al Comisiei de Informatii a NATO, initiativa perceputa de diplomati ca o posibila compromitere a securitatii aliantei, scrie International Herald Tribune, preluat de Mediafax.
New NATO intelligence chief was trained by KGB By Judy Dempsey – International Herald Tribune Published: February 3, 2008
BERLIN: The new chief of the Hungarian secret services, who spent six years at the KGB’s academy in Moscow during the 1980s, has become chairman of NATO’s intelligence committee, a development that diplomats said could compromise the security of the alliance. Sandor Laborc, 49, was personally chosen by Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsany of Hungary as director of the country’s counterintelligence National Security Office in December, after a bitter dispute between the governing coalition led by the Socialists – the former Communists – and the main opposition party, Fidesz. Laborc, a former Communist who was trained at the KGB’s Dzerzhinsky Academy from 1983 to 1989, according to members of the national security committee in the Hungarian Parliament, had failed to win support from that committee, which oversees such appointments. Despite that, Gyurcsany and Gyorgy Szilvasy, the minister responsible for the intelligence services, pushed through the appointment. “A decision by the National Security Committee has no binding effect,” Gyurcsany’s office said in a statement issued in response to several written questions about Laborc from the International Herald Tribune. “Gyorgy Szilvasy had the right to make a decision in his own capacity and advise the prime minister. He justified the recommendation by introducing General Laborc as someone with unquestioned professional credentials.” Soon after his appointment, Laborc took over the chairmanship of NATO’s special committee dealing with a wide range of intelligence issues, a rotating post that is held for a year and which fell to Hungary last month, alliance officials confirmed Friday. The committee, whose main task is to analyze and share intelligence, includes all of the secret service chiefs of NATO countries, who meet several times a year. Several NATO delegations, including the United States, whose ambassador was asked several times to comment on Laborc’s appointment, declined to do so. James Appathurai, a NATO spokesman, said, “We do not comment on personnel appointments or intelligence issues.” Some delegations said they had not been aware of Laborc’s biography. His short curriculum vitae posted on the Hungarian security service’s official Web site makes no mention of his time spent in Moscow. His past came to light when Szilvasy proposed him for the top intelligence job last autumn. NATO diplomats who did agree to discuss the appointment insisted on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. They said that even if they had reservations about Laborc, they were in no position to block his appointment. “NATO makes decisions on the basis of consensus,” said a senior diplomat from an East European country. “If we had questioned this appointment then we would have to go further up to the top, in this case the Hungarian prime minister, to ask him about Laborc’s past.” Another diplomat, from a Western country, said, “It would have taken one phone call by the U.S. ambassador to NATO to stop this appointment. It would have been a signal to other countries which might think they can still get away with this.” In its statement, Gyurcsany’s office said: “Not a single ambassador protested. Through diplomatic channels we received information that our partners are satisfied with the development of interagency cooperation.” In practice, Laborc’s appointment means that some NATO countries will be much more wary about sharing sensitive intelligence. “Here we have a person who was trained by the KGB. I cannot assume that he has changed that much in his attitudes,” said another NATO diplomat, predicting that several important NATO countries would hold back on sharing intelligence. “NATO, it must be said, is a very leaky organization,” the diplomat added. Indeed, NATO has been plagued with leaks. Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic joined the alliance in 1999, and the rest of the former Warsaw Pact countries in 2004. After that expansion, military attachés from the Bulgarian delegation did not receive clearance to have access to a certain level of intelligence material. “You could bet that anything we shared with Bulgaria inside NATO went straight to Moscow ,” said another senior Western European diplomat. “The old Communist nomenklatura and secret services is still around in Romania and Bulgaria. But I must say the case of Hungary is very, very disappointing.” Earlier, in the spring of 1999 when NATO was selecting bombing targets in its war to stop Serbian repression of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, Greece, a member of NATO and the European Union but an ally of Serbia during the Balkan wars of the 1990s, repeatedly leaked alliance plans to Belgrade, NATO diplomats said Friday. In Hungary itself , Laborc’s appointment has deepened the mistrust and polarization between the governing Socialists and the Fidesz opposition because of the way the prime minister by-passed the Parliament’s national security committee.
Although the committee’s decision is not constitutionally binding, such committees have served as important instruments of democratic accountability since 1990, when the Communists were removed from power in Hungary. Moreover, until 2002 when the Socialists won the parliamentary elections, any Hungarian official who had served for more than a year in Moscow could not, for security reasons, be appointed to positions higher than a department head. “At stake is the fundamental regard for the rule of law,” said Janos Martonyi, a former Hungarian foreign minister and Fidesz supporter. After a five-hour debate by the national security committee in late November, Laborc failed to win a majority of the 11 votes. No other candidate was offered by the government. The opposition declined to put forward a candidate. Fidesz claims that Gyurcsany, a former Communist youth leader turned millionaire who has close ties to President Vladimir Putin of Russia, has been politicizing the secret services for domestic reasons in order to keep track of the opposition, the media and trade unions. The opposition also has criticzed Gyurcsany for trying to push through austerity measures without public consultation or democratic accountability. It has challenged the security services’ use of live ammunition against mostly peaceful demonstrators during protests in September 2006. The protests had been set off by a leak of Gyurcsany’s speech to party supporters, soon after the spring 2006 elections, in which he said the party had lied “day and night” about the miserable state of the economy in order to win. Zsolt Nemeth, chairman of the Parliament’s foreign affairs committee and a leading member of Fidesz, said it was “a great shame what is happening to the idea of democratic accountability.” He said the two biggest concerns over the Laborc appointment were that he would replace the young professionals who entered the services during the 1990s and bring back people loyal to Gyurcsany. “Above all, our concern is that the security services will be become politicized and be used for domestic politics,” he added. Peter Balazs, an economics professor at Central European University in Budapest and a supporter of the government, dismissed Fidesz’s criticisms. “Much has changed in Hungary since Laborc’s time spent in Moscow over 20 years ago,” he said. “This is all about internal politics. Just because someone was in Moscow during the 1980s, I don’t think that we should sack anybody after 20 years.” Besides the opposition, the United States and Britain are concerned about Gyurcsany’s relations with Putin, according to British diplomats in London. Last year, Gyurcsany publicly supported Russia’s plans to build the South Stream pipeline that will compete with the EU project known as Nabucco, which is intended to weaken Europe’s dependence on Russian gas imports. British diplomats, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that Gyurcsany had changed tack under American and British pressure. Then last December, during a meeting of the Hungarian and Russian cabinets in Budapest, Gyurcsany came out again in support of the South Stream project.
July 12th, 2008 
VR 
Servicile speciale engleze MI-5 au decis sa contraatace. Prea multele si insistentele scormoneli ale spionilor rusi in perimetrul englez i-au convins pe sefii MI-5 sa decida reinfiintarea serviciului informational specializat cu contracararea spionajului rus si al altor tari din Estul Europei.
Posted in Uncategorized 
Tags: 
