It is sometimes unkindly said that military intelligence is an oxymoron. But while the exposure by Dutch authorities of the identities and activities of four members of Russia’s GRU military intelligence service is embarrassing for the Kremlin, we should not be misled by their apparent ineptness.
The somewhat crude nature of their cyber-hacking efforts – the aerial hidden beneath a coat, the laptop revealing past missions, and taxi receipts showing the group’s movements are not the point.
The most salient element of these revelations is the sheer brazenness of the attempts by the GRU to hack agencies investigating the Salisbury poisoning, the alleged downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 by a Russian missile, and the World Anti-Doping Agency responsible for the banning of Russia from world athletics.
Even before the Netherlands released unprecedented details of its intelligence about the GRU’s activities, this was not “covert” espionage as we would normally recognise it. The Salisbury attack itself was carried out using a weapon which would almost certainly identify Russia. One of the most sinister aspects of the Kremlin’s actions –despite the official denials and the ridicule of the allegations in Russian media – is the extent to which they are happening in plain sight.
What should the response be? Jeremy Hunt, the Foreign Secretary has called for the EU to follow the US in imposing sanctions. An international cyber-defence effort is underway.
But America is also currently carrying out the biggest ever investigation into Russian interference in its electoral process. Labour’s Tom Watson has called for a public inquiry here on similar lines. He is right – it is naive to think our own democracy, and the referenda on Brexit and Scottish Independence were immune from such activities. We need to know more about such Russian interference, its impact. Only a public inquiry can give us the answers
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here