Talk:Foreign Intelligence Service (Russia)/Archive 1

This article needs improvement

Tag

Large portions of this are written in an uncited and overly praising tone of voice. 68.39.174.238 17:58, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. This article is almost unreadable. It should be improved.Biophys 02:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

It is also completely unsourced. Please provide sources. Otherwise, one can remove unsourced statements at any time.Biophys 02:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Some parts of the article look like advertisement. Please come and enroll!Biophys 02:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh really? Biophys have you ever seen CIA article? Or you are afraid of CIA and don't mess with their advertisement page? Vlad fedorov 03:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

No one provided any sources. So, I begin editing with sources that I have.Biophys 02:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Biophys, why not try the SVR homepage? It has an org chart. The Kouzminov book is good, but basically rehashes a bunch of warmed over stuff we already know about. He makes the same mistake many authors and so-called "experts" on Russian security services make concerning SVR's organizational structure in applying the old KGB structure to today's SVR. Since he has failed to read and thoroughly peruse the SVR web site and actually contact the SVR directly for information, it actually calls into question the timeliness of the information he provides in his book and thus its accuracy. Biophys, I think you seem to have some sort of chip on your shoulder concerning SVR and that might affect your objectivity. The information in the article can be found in the official RF sites (Kremlin and both the Federation Council and Duma) and on the SVR's official home page. So, at this point it is referenced. I recommend "Tag" be removed (that does not mean that as new information comes forth that we can't make edits as the need arises in the future).

When we are writing an article about a notable person, it is always important to use some outside sources about him, not something that he is telling about himself. Same thing with organizations. Secondary rather than "primary" sources are recommended by WP:SOURCE policy. This is especially the case, when this is not an ordinary organization, but organization that suppose to hide its work methods and intentions (budget is classified, etc.).Biophys 04:09, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Kouzminov provides several Appendices in his book. One for the former KGB First Directorate structure, and another about SVR. So, I am using his data for SVR. Biophys 04:13, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

This article has one huge problem. It does not tell anything concrete about work of SVR.Biophys 04:44, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

First, Biophys SVR is an intelligence service. They don't really talk about what they really do. Neither does CIA, SIS, Mossad, PRC MSS, RAW, etc. They all have P.R. offices though, just like any corporation or other government agencies. Intelligence, like it or not, is a secret business--that means they don't publicize the various facets of what they do. Most major corporations have Intelligence units (or contract such work out); every government engages in intelligence work. Perhaps you would like to ask the Department of Homeland Security about what exactly their intelligence unit actually does or is supposed to be doing. Whether we like it or not intelligence gathering and analysis has been on-going for thousands of years and will always be going on. Intelligence, Biophys, is the second oldest profession (or occupation), it kind of is human nature to want to know what the other guy is up to or planning to do.

Intelligence organizations, by virtue of what they are, do not exist for the sake of publicizing concrete information concerning their missions, sources and methods. If they started doing that, they'd be out of business. Biophys, I think the problem you're having is that as a scientific person you probably believe in broad information dissemination about every concrete facet and boring detail; intelligence is more into the safeguarding of information in order to protect individuals and populations. Can you really verify everything in CIA, SIS wikipedia sites? Not entirely. Should it still be there? Yes, unless it's something extremely bizarre or designed to unduly negatively slant an opinion (as we've all seen with vandalism). Biophys, these are articles to share information about various organizations; we're not writing a longitudinal study for publication in JAMA or SCIENCE.

Abuses of power and authority can occur in any organization. We could discuss why a female CIA Logistics Officer "misappropriated" an alleged $ 1 million in U.S. taxpayer money; or the on-going investigation into procurement abuses concerning the former CIA Executive Director. We could write books about handling of "petty cash" in Iraq. We could spend eons delving into the abuses of the KGB. It isn't common but it does happen that an intell chief in an embassy is declared PNG (persona non grata) by the host government or is denied entry into a country. We could talk about the SIS's operational sloppiness (Rock in the Park) in Moscow that could have jeopardized the lives of many agents that the British were running. Biophys, the reality is that effective intelligence work generally involves operational success and that means no one knowing what's going down or how it went down. That's why we only generally hear about the failures, the embarassments, the disasters with respect to any intelligence service. Admittedly, we don't hear about when they do it right because if they're doing it right...we don't hear about it.

On to the organizational structure...The SVR on their 2007 web site states what their organizational structure is. According to proper reporting criteria (and American Psychological Association style), that's what has to be reported. 2007 information trumps 2006 (since the book you cite was published in 2006- the information probably was current 2005 at best). If you question the veracity of what the SVR's current organizational structure is then, do you question what CIA, DIA, SIS, et. al. state their organizational structures to be? I don't. If SVR, CIA, FBI, DIA, SIS, et.al. tell you what their current organizational structures are, you have to accept it. They know their organizations far better than you or I do. Kouzminov does not cite the SVR 2007 web site which is currently available. Anyway, if you read the wikipedia sites on the various intelligence services, you have some vague notion of why they exist at least and what their respective organizational missions are. That's good enough.

Our goal here is to create informative, readable and interesting articles. There is enough sources to improve this article. Right now it official, difficult to read and even not informative.Biophys 03:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Let's collect some information

It was claimed at The Intelligence Summit that "Russian intelligence operatives working for SVR in Damascus intercepted Israeli communications in the July, 2006 in Lebanon, to the advantage of Hezbollah". [1]

• The Indian Playground of the Soviet KGB - interesting in retrospective
• Litvinenko's Poisoning: Detailed Unfolding of Events "Russian intelligence operations in London are carried out mostly by the SVR, Russia’s overseas intelligence agency, and the GRU, its military intelligence"
• "Official London agreed to station a legal SVR representative, withdrawing its demand to the SVR to reach an agreement with the Russian Military Intelligence (GRU), so they would both have only one representative in the British capital. However, the British disliked the candidacy of Vyacheslav Gurginov as the official SVR man in London, and he was denied a visa in February, 1994. The British said he was involved in supplying secret data to Saddam Hussein." MI-6 versus KGB-FSB: The Battle in MoscowBiophys 05:13, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
• Igor the assassin reportedly worked for SVR [2].Biophys 05:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Organizational structure

Could you please provide exact reference? I looked through the SVR web site. This is a "self-published" "primary" source that can be used, but it is less reliable than "secondary" sources published by third parties. You probably took the information about SVR organizational structure from a Russian-language chart, which is only partly consistent with your text. The site also tells the following: Исходя из этих принципов и в соответствии с законом "О внешней разведке", принятом в декабре 1995 года, построена сегодняшняя организационная структура СВР РФ. Она включает:

    - оперативные;
    - аналитические;
    - функциональные подразделения (управления, службы, самостоятельные отделы).
    Впервые в практике российских спецслужб было создано Бюро по связям с общественностью и средствами массовой информации. 

This is not organizational structure of SVR. Biophys 03:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

To summarize. We have some contradictions between a "self-published" primary source (that does not provide specific information) and several secondary sources published by third parties. Latter is preferred according to WP:SOURCE.Biophys 22:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Sourcing

Also note that I asked several times about providing references. I am going to delete or modify any unsourced text.Biophys 03:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC) Note that you deleted my sourced text, and I am going to restore it unless you can provide better sources.Biophys 03:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Collecting some info about SVR

Putin appointed former SVR chief Vyacheslav Trubnikov first deputy of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the presidential envoy in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries in June 2000. According to Russian media, Trubnikov’s appointment suggested a tougher Moscow line toward the CIS and Baltic countries. At the same time, it signaled the comeback of Primakov and his team to the foreign policy arena as Primakov joined Putin’s administration as the coordinator of Russia-Moldova settlement. Trubnikov’s appointment apparently paid off. At the CIS summit in Moscow—21-23 June 2000—these countries supported Putin’s request to establish “a joint anti-terrorist center.” The center, to be located in Moscow and funded by the Russian Government, was to be headed by FSB Gen. Boris Mylnikov.

Putin appointed SVR veteran Mikhail Dmitriev as the Defense Ministry official responsible for the rearmament of the country’s defense forces and also for the export of weapons and military technology. Until August 2000, Lieutenant-General Dmitriev directed the SVR’s analytic information directorate.173 His appointment followed the consolidation of the Rosoboronprom under another SVR veteran, Andrei Belyaninov. Their appointments gave Putin direct control over these two key areas.

SVR chief Sergei Lebedev stated that, in the course of the 20th century, “there has not been any place on the planet where a KGB officer has not been.”207 The SVR celebrated not only the anniversary of the Cheka but also the anniversary of the establishment of its immediate predecessor—the foreign department of the OGPU, which was founded in 1920. Putin went to SVR headquarters for the celebrations. Others taking part in the commemoration were former KGB/SVR chiefs— Kryuchkov, Shebarshin, Primakov, and Trubnikov— as well as some of its most famous agents and spies, including British defector George Blake.

In addition, the SVR marked its 80-anniversary by opening its own Internet site at www.svr.gov.ru. The site reports briefly on its current activities and more extensively about the past glories of the KGB, including special pages on Pavel Sudoplatov and the activities of Kim Philby and the Cambridge Five.

In May 1999, the Russian media reported that Russia’s SVR concluded that Pasko was a foreign spy. The service reportedly said that the Japanese journalists, Takao Dzyun, Tadashi Okano, Nasu Hiroquki, Akihito Sato, and Yamauchi Toshikiku, were all intelligence officers. If Pasko carried out tasking by these officers and received money from them, he was their agent.

Speaking at a 21 December 1995 Moscow celebration of the 75th anniversary of the formation of the VChK-KGB-SVR, Primakov declared that NATO expansion would create a “security threat” for Russia. Primakov said that trying to understand the “true motives” of those who advocate NATO enlargement is a key task of the SVR and added his agency would seek to block the alliance’s expansion while trying to establish good relations with former Cold War adversaries. Primakov said Russian policy should seek to prevent the emergence of a “global hegemony” by the United States.

The SVR also has reportedly concluded formal cooperation agreements with the intelligence services of several former Soviet republics, including Azerbaijan and Belarus, which cover gathering and sharing intelligence.

An agreement on intelligence cooperation between Russia and China was signed in Beijing at the end of the summer of 1992. It envisaged the restoration of the cooperation in the area of intelligence, which had been cut off in 1959. This secret treaty covered the activities of the GRU and the SVR, which are cooperating with the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s Military Intelligence Directorate.

SVR economic intelligence activities includes the identification of both threats to Russian interests as well as emerging opportunities, such as advantageous market trends for particular types of commodities and raw materials.

In addition to the economic, scientific, and technical focus of collections efforts noted above, human intelligence (HUMINT) collection against American intelligence agencies also has been ongoing, as exemplified by the 1996 arrests of FBI agent Earl Edwin Pitts and CIA offi cer Harold James Nicholson. The end of 1996 was also marked by the case of former SVR Col. Vladimir Galkin, provoking a noisy scandal that added tension to Russian-American relations and relations between the SVR and the CIA.261 President Putin secretly directed the SVR and the GRU to increase their activities in the United States. Putin’s 2001 directive included orders to clarify the political context of statements by several members of the new US administration and to track developments related to NMD. Russian Security Council Secretary Ivanov is to coordinate this effort.262 Biophys 00:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-encyclopedic style

This is fun. Current version of this article tells that "No longer are the analytical products (assessments, estimates, white papers, and strategic studies) geared toward a preconceived or political agenda or rife with Communist era political correctness, but are geared with a mandate of objectivity from analysis of both open source and collected information. This is a major change because under the U.S.S.R., the political leaders wanted the raw intelligence and would perform the "analysis" themselves- whereas the Russian Federation's leaders want professional, scholarly, in-depth analyses and briefings provided for them. SVR analysts tend to be paid far higher salaries and benefits than their counterparts in academia or think tanks and represent some of the best minds in the Russian Federation." ..."Unlike intelligence analysts in other foreign intelligence services, SVR analysts are not shy about adding their opinions and providing recommended courses of action (with projected outcomes analyses) as addenda to their products; in fact, President Yeltsin and President Putin and their administrations have encouraged this practice."

instead of simply telling that, unlike KGB of the past, SVR decides for Russian leaders Yeltsin and Putin what they should do (see Mitrokhin books and other sources. Biophys 22:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

2. Another example. "Under the current Administration and General Sergei Lebedev's (the current Director) leadership, the salaries and benefits paid to SVR officers have improved significantly. The days of the mid-1990s, where SVR had problems making payroll, are gone. As an example, in 2002, all SVR Officers received an across-the-board 50% raise (in addition to the ordinary salary adjustments for state employees) and new (tax-free) allowances to afford a home, condominium, or apartment in the Russian Federation (even while stationed overseas). SVR officers currently receive competitive salaries with the Russian and CIS private economic sectors and special tax advantages. Retirement benefits are correlated to the Russian military's defined benefit plan (regular, non-contributory annuity) and are higher than those provided to other civil servants, and the social insurance plan (which provides regular payments for women at age 60 and men at age 65, survivors payments and disability payments). President Putin has reportedly expressed a desire for civil servants to have a savings-investment plan like that provided by the U.S. Government to its federal civilian employees and members of the uniformed services. The SVR and the FSB are believed to be the first two federal entities where a thrift savings-investment plan would be offered as a third tier to complement the regular annuity and social insurance plans."

Instead of simpply telling: "SVR officers are well-paid". But how well? This is top secret. The entire article is like that.

Another example: "...now only the best and brightest, cream-of-the-crop candidates are being hired to become SVR officers. Minimum requirements are being between 21 and 35 years old (age waivers may be granted on a case-by-case basis by the SVR Director), being a Russian citizen, no prior criminal record (no felonies, drug use, hooliganism, moral turpitude), good mental and physical health, and having a bachelor's degree. A graduate degree in law, international relations, foreign languages, public administration, economics, criminal justice, business, geographic area studies, engineering, computer science, or history is desired. Prior military experience and overseas experience is considered desirable. Unlike the KGB, the SVR welcomes all races, ethnicities and creeds."

Is that an advertisement in a newspaper about hiring new people? Please do not be surprised when I remove such things.Biophys 22:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Biophys, primary sources can be used (i.e., svr.gov.ru). There is an actual organizational chart there. The org. chart has no date on it as you're trying to imply. Actually, the SVR site showed something new. The bachelor's degree is no longer the minimum requirement (graduate/professonal degree is). Have no idea why the change. Mitrokhin is a good text and is one source (along with CD-ROM of SVR official history) that can be used. The org structure though is outdated in Mitrokhin and he delves only with the early SVR years not the Trubnikov and Lebedev leadership years. I come from public administration field and find article very interesting. "Interesting" is subjective. Legal aspects can be found by just simply getting a copy of the R.F. Constitution (R.F. Embassy or Kremlin website)and going to Duma or Federation Council to see Law on Intelligence Organs-1996. Biophys, I think you're making too much out of this and need to calm down. I don't think SVR necessarily decides what the R.F. leadership should do; I think that they make recommendations that can be taken under advisement in the decision-making process. It would be inappropriate (and unsubstantiated) to say that SVR calls all the shots and tells the leadership exactly what to do. When learning about intelligence organizations and intelligence operations, the focus is on organization, legal basis, kinds of people each intelligence service hires, possibly even how they're trained. Those are the elementary foundations. SVR is only 15 years old; CIA is now 60 years old; SIS is 125 years old. SVR, even though it technically emanates from the KGB's FCD and KGB predecessors, is a young intelligence service when considered in its own right. It's possible that it has not generated as much dirty laundry to talk about as the other older and more mature intelligence services have. So, on that basis alone, there's less to discuss. Most of SVR's history is under KGB section and I think you are wanting to put KGB stuff over with SVR stuff which would be inappropriate. KGB and SVR are temporally, legally, structurally and politically 2 separate entities. Scientists like all this detail and if we were to get access to all these details like you want then, the article would truly be unreadable and like reading some of those god-awful biomedical science articles (where the entire article feels like slogging through a never-ending footnote of boring details). As is, the article provides a sketch of the SVR as a fledgling intelligence service. In time, stuff can be added as situation changes in R.F. and the overall global situation changes.

You probably think that I do not read any literature. But there are many good sources about SVR. This will be big article.Biophys 05:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Biophys, I never implied you did not read any literature. The problem is that you seem to want to have an edge on smut and because of your human rights affiliation and that Russian journalist who died, I just really don't think that you can be objective and unbiased about SVR or any other nation's intelligence service. That's where my concern is. We're not here to dredge up unproven and untried allegations, especially allegations that have not been adjudicated in a court of law or any other official jurisdictional fact-finding body. Wikipedia is not (or should not) be about unbridled defamation of character or impugnment of any individual's or organization's reputation. What if you go and put a bunch of stuff out there on wikipedia that alleges what could be construed as criminal wrongdoing and then it turns out some court somewhere on the face of the earth adjudicates to an opposing conclusion as what you put out there, or final evidence shows you to be wrong. There goes your credibility.

The basis for the SVR is in the 1996 Law on Intelligence Organs. Anyone can get a copy of the Russian Federation's Constitution. For you to "TAG" this section unfortunately shows that you may not be acting in good faith concerning this article. This is public information. Also, before you solely run full force into using what such-and-such author claims, or such-and-such heard and put in some book somewhere, why don't you go to CIA and obtain their publication concerning Russian Intelligence (I believe it may be available through the Library of Congress and their DOCEX program), and also contact the SVR's Press Bureau for further information. You seem to want to hide behind what these various authors want to claim; you'd be amazed what can get published and get passed some editors nowadays. I believe there is an old maxim about not believing everything you read in print and even less of what you hear.

Lastly, I'm not unsympathetic to human rights but I do not necessarily believe that wikipedia is the best forum (or fora) to push the human rights agenda with respect to sections that are designed to be merely descriptive about various security services and their organizational precepts.

Human rights are irrelevant. Could you just provide some interesting sources about SVR activities (with http address) except SVR web site? That would be real help. I have included already a link to USA counter-intelligence site.Biophys 01:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Last deletion

With regard to my last deletion, please see Wikipedia:Business_FAQ. Wikipedia is not the place to conduct recruitment and advertise any corporations, even such as SVR.Biophys 04:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Minor changes were made on the current organizational structure (see: svr.gov.ru). Also, concerning ABP note Vopros Section of said site. Red Banner became Academy of Foreign Intelligence- does the same mission though- just different name. Intelligence Institute became the A & I Directorate- thus, it was given greater org. stature. No offense, I put some conjunctions in your English grammar. Be careful when making allegations concerning a religious entity- saying the Russian Orthodox Church is a part of the SVR. Bit hard to believe especially when attested to by an "alleged" former SVR operative. Since the operative is "alleged" his assertion must therefore be "alleged". So I qualified the sentence by saying "alleged" in front of Russian Orthodox Church. The section on the SVR's Legal Basis needs a make-over. Its legal basis is stated in Russian law (actual laws verbatim from a code of law meet encyclopaedic style). The actual Russian version I read was very different from the various English translations. Before making further changes (because of a lack of time), I let it go at that and await feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.12.15.226 (talk) 19:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem, please go ahead. Just try to follow WP standards. We must have a clear and concise text supported by outside sources, rather than by web site of SVR itself.Biophys 19:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)