Insidious. No better word can apply to the traitor. Each day, he greets his colleagues at work, only to betray them in the course of that very day. What should have been absolute trust among fellow workers is eroded by those who want more. In most cases, that something is money. For the most part, the insider American traitor betrays for money. He spies for Russia, Cuba, Iran, or China, let’s say, for what they can pay him.
Aldrich Ames betrayed the CIA and many of the agency’s foreign-recruited agents for money. However, there are those who believe themselves to be secret warriors, who betray not for money, but because they believe in a cause. Indeed, they are insulted if a spy handler who recruited them even offers cash. They betray for free, to fulfill some crusade known only to themselves. Recall the Myers couple who spied for Cuba for three decades as ideological spies, apparently not for the money.
Kendall Myers stated, “I can see nothing of value that has been lost by the revolution. The revolution has released enormous potential and liberated the Cuban spirit.” What exactly are insider spies betraying, since what they are serving seems so clear to them?
A Look At Betrayal
Consider those cleared personnel, who as civil servants swear the oath of office, “I, ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
This oath is taken as an affirmation of loyalty to the Constitution of the United States. Civil servants defend the document that defines who we are as a nation. We’ve seen throughout history how this oath has been distorted to political ends. Some officials have demanded lie detector tests of anyone they suspect of ‘disloyalty,’ generally identified as those who ‘leak’ information. Often, the loyalty they suspect was betrayed was personal, not a legitimate loyalty to the Constitution. During the 1980s, a policy was enacted under which all civil servants with higher clearances, some 180,000 people, were to be given lie detector tests. It caused chaos, since it was pointed out that a whole battalion of polygraphers (which didn’t exist) and endless man-hours would be wasted on such ‘loyalty’ tests. Indeed, it was one man, George Shultz, who, as Secretary of State, said he would not take the test. He said he’d resign if ordered to take such a test. In fact, he stated, ”the minute in this Government that I am told that I’m not trusted.”
Defending the Document
To Shultz’s credit, the government relented. They went back to using the lie detector as a tool to be employed only if scoped properly. If investigators were suspicious of actual espionage, with indicators requiring further investigation, the polygraph could help with that investigation. Otherwise, no, there was no justification for mass accusations requiring proof of one’s innocence. The whole effort began as a means to stop leaks, not espionage at all. A man of Shultz’s stature brought the vast paranoia to an end.
We who protect classified programs must remember our oath of office. We need to remember that without the Constitution, we have nothing to protect. If we are violating the very document that justifies our job, what are we doing with such a job in the first place? Remember, too, that investigators adhere to the very same oath as we do. If they violate their trust, then why are they doing what they are hired to do?
Our oath, our promise, carries our very integrity with it. We should not violate it either actively, by betraying our colleagues and nation, or passively, by allowing others to do so. George Shultz said it best when he said he would resign the minute it was clear he was no longer trusted as Secretary of State. Requiring that he be polygraphed to prove his innocence went against the meaning of his oath and American justice, which argues that we are innocent until proven guilty. We are a nation of laws, not a nation where you have to prove your innocence.
