#15 - JRL 8155 - JRL Home
Subject: Re: Sutyagin and other spy stories
From: Kirill Pankratov (kpankratov@cri-inc.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004
Many articles on the outcome of Igor Sutyagin trial declared his innocence no matter what, and involved comments like "human rights activists and lawyers denounced the trial as unfair and rigged" (JRL 8153, #3), "the FSB has zealously pursued scholars for little more than having contacts with the West" (JRL 8153, #4).
This story is definitely not as simple as that. I don't know details of the trial and verdict, but I am somewhat more familiar than the general public with the earlier part of the Sutyagin story.
Aside from his job at the Institute of USA and Canada, Sutyagin was affiliated with the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies, http://www.armscontrol.ru, at Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (PhysTech). In particular he was among the authors of the book on Russian nuclear forces, published by this research institution: http://www.russianforces.org/eng/booKk/
In 1989-90 I was one of the founders of this center. It originated from the first summer school on "global" affairs (security, energy, environment) held at PhysTech in August 1989, on the wave of the perestroika euphoria, with delegations from research centers from some leading western universities ? MIT, Princeton, Imperial College among others, and a Chinese group. Most of the Russian participants like myself were senior-year students or recent PhysTech graduates, politically active and idealistic, and (naively to some extent) had rose-shaded views of everything coming from "the West". In the aftermath of this school we decided to continue our activities and maintain close relations with our recent guests from US and other countries. For about a year I presided over and moderated our weekly meetings and other activities. Several other summer schools - with even more marticipants - were held in subsequent years in different countries and universities. Our modest discussion group evolved into a pretty solid research center (perhaps the first non-government academic institution in Russia devoted to security studies, much of which was previously top secret and beyond public discussion), with permanent positions and graduate students.
I don't know Sutyagin personally ? he came much later and was only informally associated with this center, co-authoring some articles and books with researchers from PhysTech. I know very well other authors of the above-mentioned book ? in particular the editor Pavel Podvig, who extensively commented in Russian and foreign media on the Sutyagin's affair, defending him. Yet Podvig himself had little doubt that the "consultancy" Alternative Futures was an intelligence outfit. He told me once how he unsuccessfully tried to find them in order to help Sutyagin (he also showed me their rather strange-looking business card). Soon after the Sutyagin's arrest Alternative Futures disappeared completely - it was just one-room office in London with a shared receptionist and a defunct answering machine, and no traces of any other "projects" performed by said establishment could be found. I guess that's what often passes for "independent organization promoting democracy and pluralism in Russia".
Sutyagin trial arises some legitimate questions, in particular why had it taken so long since his arrest, and involved quite a few procedural violations. What is of little doubt, however, is that the knowing, unauthorized cooperation with a foreign intelligence service would get one in trouble in any country, not only in Russia.
The Moscow Times article "Sutyagin Verdict Worries Scientists", http://www.moscowtimes.ru/stories/2004/04/07/001.html, also mentioned another "spy story" - of Edmund Pope, the US citizen convicted of spying several years ago. I had a passing brush with this story myself.
In the fall of 2001, after his pardon and return to US, Edmund Pope released a book "Torpedoed" about his (mis)adventures in Russia. I took an interest in this story and after reading his account I became convinced that he was indeed a spy ? based not just on the trial outcome, but on the overwhelming evidence available in public sources about this case. I presented my arguments in the reader's review of his book (which was pretty much a wholesale slander of everything Russian) at Amazon.com. Rather than repeating my points, if anybody is interested, the review can be seen here: http://kirill.onlinefiction.net/nastik.htm. The review itself is at the bottom of the page, the first part (in Russian) is my letter to the translator of the Russian version of this book Nastik Gryzunova (yes, Virginia, the book was translated and is freely available in Russia ? so much for the "complete media clampdown" ? I doubt that in a similar case such a book would be translated and available to the US audience).
Some interesting things happened afterwards. I received many supporting e-mails, in particular from a well-known Russian scientist Vladimir K. who worked with Pope and became convinced of his spying intent. After a few months he confronted Pope and ceased their collaboration. He presented to me some private information that fully corroborated my arguments. Several weeks after publication of my review it disappeared from the Amazon.com site. Moreover, in the best Stalinist traditions, several subsequent reader's reviews that explicitly mentioned mine, were edited so that all references to my review were deleted. A very nice example of the freedom of speech, indeed!
Although I personally try to avoid secrets and spooks, I recognize that spying in various forms is a widespread activity, practiced by pretty much everybody; it even has some positive stabilizing effects. But there was always silent understanding that, when caught, one has to retreat quietly and not declare shrilly "outrage". This tacit gentlemanly assumption was clearly violated with Sutyagin case and shady Alternative Futures outfit, and with Edmund Pope story. To claim "ravished innocence" after operating in such a blunt and obvious manner, is, frankly, ridiculous, and should be pointed out in no uncertain terms.