Spies and Influence

The recent Russian spy arrests gives more than an insight into a changing, gentrified spy world; it comments on the very nature of society and where the leverage is. LeCarre is quite gone. The spy no longer looks to compromise an official with the proverbial "dead girl or live boy" in bed. No more complex financial exchanges, no simple sex and/or cash. Nor is there the search for the famous deluded idealist. No, these spies go to Harvard and then try to get on commissions.This is the line from the Russian headquarters to one of the spies, Murphy, quoted in the L.A.Times: "The group allegedly attended one of Moscow's most elite spy schools before landing in America. Their mission was spelled out, somewhat awkwardly, in a 2009 message to the Murphy's from Moscow Center.'You were sent to USA for long-term service trip,' the message read, according to the FBI affidavit. 'Your education, bank accounts, car, house etc. — all these serve one goal: fulfill your main mission, i.e, to search and develop ties in policymaking circles in US and send intels [intelligence reports] to C [Center].'"

"Policymaking circles?" Guys just sitting around? Is the implication here that the informal groups that casually discuss and advocate policies are a real power that infiltrating units hope to learn from and perhaps influence? And are those Russian interests so acceptable to us that they could be advocated by a seemingly honest American without much suspicion or risk? Have the enemies of the United States analysized us and decided that weapons and tactics are not as rewarding a spy target as formal and informal policy conferences? Does a spy get more bang for his buck sitting at a GDP luncheon than stealing a guidence system blueprint? Does a bullet he inserts in a Power Point have more impact on his manipulative plans than a titanium one? Has confrontation become a nudge? Can the aims and opinions that advance the Russian state really be presented to American conferences as just other ideas?

One of the great problems in the government occurs when a policy seems to confound logic and national benefit. The immigration debate stumbles to mind. The advantage of coming to this country illegally is to have your children automatically made citizens and recipients of welfare benefits, education and safety. Moreover you are an attractive employee as you have lower wage demands with no withholding or social security taxes. But the declaration that the government cannot control its own borders reveals an ineptness in an area that most people think is basic and consequently undermines the government. Moreover, to make an illegal immigrant a citizen has no effect on his children but eliminates the major reason to employ him as his wages and tax expenses will immediately rise. So amnesty will make the government a laughingstock , creates a huge number of unemployed and will not solve the underlying problem of terrorist infiltration or the attractiveness of illegal workers. So it makes no sense and consequently inspires theories that try to make sense of the decision by emphasizing more shadowy motives.

This administration has been making and supporting some peculiar decisions. This new spy information should make great talk show fodder.