The British Security Service (MI5)

Source:

Richard Dimbleby Memorial Lecture, given by Mrs Stella Rimington, Director General of the Security Service, and broadcast on BBC television, 1994.

((Editor's annotations are given in double brackets thus))

The Framework

There are three British security and intelligence services:

.MI5 - the Security Service 
.((previously also known by covername Box 500))

.MI6 - the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS)
.((previously also known by covername Government Communications ...Bureau(GCB)))

.The Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)
.((the national SIGINT agency, controlling the joint civilian/military Composite ..Signals Organisation (CSO), known colloquially as 'Q', or 'the West Country'))

The role of SIS and GCHQ is to collect foreign intelligence.

MI5 - the Security Service - is the defensive service, the national security intelligence agency.  Its role is to safeguard the survival and wellbeing of the state against substantial threats, covertly organised and purposeful.  It currently (1994) has approximately 2000 staff; some 50% are female, and 50% are under the age of 40.

The Security Service is now governed by Act of Parliament - the Security Service Act.

 Security Service Responsibilities

The present Security Service was founded in 1909 to counter the threat of German espionage, its main function in WW1 and WW2.  In the Cold War, its main effort was to counter the intelligence services of the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies.

Counter-espionage

Since the collapse of Soviet Communism, the tasks have changed radically.  Counter-espionage now accounts for only 25% of resources, half what it was in 1991.

Responding to these changes, links have been formed with former Warsaw Pact countries once we were convinced  democracy had taken root and espionage against the UK had stopped.  Together with SIS, the Security Service has provided advice and support for their re-organised security services, not least how to set up a democratic framework for their work.  Information has been shared especially on terrorism. As an example, in 1993 a joint operation halted a large weapons consignment originating in Poland and destined for so-called loyalist terrorists in Northern Ireland.

Russia is different.  We no longer have to fear the intense military-related espionage of the Cold War period; however, the democratic process is much less far advanced in the Russian security and intelligence services than elsewhere.  The Ames case in the USA shows we still have a threat to counter.  In 1993, the Russians reduced the number of their intelligence officers in the UK, but it has recently ((ie 1994)) been creeping up again.

The Warsaw Pact was not the only source of espionage.  Other countries continue to pose a threat, but of a lesser intensity.

Counter-subversion

There has been a significant change in relation to 'subversion', a much misunderstood term.  'Subversion' does not appear as such in the Security Service Act, but its meaning is conveyed by 'activities to overthrow or undermine parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means'.  It does not include political dissent.

The Security Service set out to identify all members of subversive groups. This enabled such members to be denied access to secret information under the vetting system introduced in 1949.  

In addition, some groups such as the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) made no secret of their aims, and attempted to infiltrate and covertly influence other organisations. This was a legitimate subject of attention by MI5, which investigated the individual subversives, and not the organisations they were attempting to infiltrate.  

Over the last 10 years the threat of subversion has diminished so it now takes up less than 5% of our time.  Some of this effort is now directed against groups on the extreme right, who are seeking to exploit racial hatred and xenophobia.

Counter-terrorism

The overwhelming focus - 75% of effort - is now concentrated on terrorism, originating both within the UK and abroad.

For the past 20 years, MI5 has been responsible for co-ordinating intelligence work against terrorism carried out from  overseas and with the potential to affect UK interests anywhere in the world.

There have been many successes, most have to remain secret.  MI5 has prevented the intelligence services of a number of Middle Eastern countries from carrying out campaigns of murder against their political opponents; has countered groups of Islamic terrorists and others originating from the Indian sub-continent; and played a major role in the investigation of the bombing of Pan Am 103 in 1988.

The threat is less than it was 10 years ago, partly because of improvements in the exchange of security intelligence, but the threat will not go away.  North African and Kurdish  groups could pose a threat, and the conflict in former Jugoslavia could spill over into terrorism in Europe and elsewhere.

However, 50% of the counter-terrorism resources are devoted to mounting intelligence operations against Irish terrorism.  The Provisional IRA (PIRA) in particular is a sophisticated and ruthless terrorist organisation which poses the most severe threat to national security.

Within Northern Ireland, MI5 provides extensive support to the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), who take the lead in gathering and exploiting intelligence.  Outside Northern Ireland, MI5 has the main responsibility for intelligence investigations into Irish terrorism anywhere in the world, for example, threats to British military personnel in Europe, terrorist attempts to obtain arms and funds from abroad.

In October 1992, the Security Service was also given responsibility for the British mainland, previously the responsibility of the ((London)) Metropolitan Police Special Branch.  However, MI5 did not assume any of the executive powers of the police, and continues to work closely with the Metropolitan and other police forces.

Counter-terrorism is not an exact science, and in an open and democratic society the initial advantage lies with the terrorist; it will never be possible to get 100% advance warning of terrorist intentions.  However, in the last 18 months, 20 Irish Republican terrorists have been arrested and charged in Great Britain, and in Northern Ireland the security forces prevent 4 out of 5 planned terrorist acts, with some 700 terrorists already convicted and serving terms of imprisonment.

Other Operations

The Security Service Act limits MI5's work to threats to national security.  MI5 is not involved with countering drug trafficking or organised crime, and would only get involved if these posed a threat to national security.

A new task is countering the spread of weapons of mass destruction - nuclear, biological and chemical.  This is not a new threat, but is made more urgent by the collapse of the USSR and the loosening of controls there. Some two dozen governments are attempting to obtain such weapons, and some of them sponsor or practise terrorism.  Some enrol students at British universities in attempts to bypass international controls.

Operational Methods

Since spies, subversives and terrorists organise and plan in secret, MI5 may use secret means to investigate them.  With proper legal authority, MI5 may tap telephones, open mail, eavesdrop on conversations; they may observe their movements secretly, or recruit members as agents.

MI5 has no executive powers. So, after analysing and assessing information gathered, it is passed on to others eg the police so that arrests can be made,  the Home Office or Foreign Office so that deportations or expulsions can be ordered.

The Security Service also provides specialist advice on protective measures, eg physical security against terrorist attack, data security against espionage.

Despite lurid reports in some quarters, the Security Service does not monitor the activities of people with a high public profile on the off chance that they could pose a risk.  Similarly, the 'peace dividend' is not being turned to surveillance of the general public or of anybody that the Service or the Government of the day feels uncomfortable about.  Nor does the Service carry out murder ('Ludicrous').  The ethos of the Service is that, as a matter of principle, any intrusion into an individual's private life must be limited to what is unavoidable in fulfilling the Service's task, and must of course be properly authorised.

Accountability

Accountability is at the heart of the tension between liberty and security - how far should one invade the privacy of the few in the interests of the nation as a whole?
International law, particularly the European Convention on Human Rights, provides a framework.

The Convention recognises the right and duty of states to provide a covert response to covertly organised threats. However, the state must respect the individual's rights, must put the security services on a clear legal basis, and must establish independent oversight.

The legal authority for MI5 is the Security Service Act of 1989.  It puts the Directive issued by the Home Secretary of the day in 1952 to the Director General of the Security Service (DGSS) on a formal statutory footing.

The DGSS is accountable to the Home Secretary for the Service's operations and efficiency.  The DGSS is personally responsible under the Act for ensuring that the Service remains independent of party political influence and does nothing that is not authorised under the act.

There is a range of controls, internal and external.  For example, any application to the Secretary of State for warrants to tap telephones is examined by the Service's legal experts, by senior management within the Service, and again by senior civil servants within the Home Office.  External Commissioners scrutinize the propriety of warrants issued by the Secretary of State and tribunals for members of the public to approach if they have a complaint against the Service.  These external bodies are composed of experienced, independent, senior legal figures.  They can, and do, read any document they wish and interview staff. The Service never sub-contracts operations in order to get round the regulations or escape scrutiny.  

A new Oversight Committee of parliamentarians to monitor the operations of all three agencies will be provided under the new Intelligence Services Act.

Secrecy has enabled conspiracy theories to emerge in the past.  One of the most serious was by ((the late)) Peter Wright ((a retired MI5 officer, in his book 'Spycatcher')) to the effect that MI5 had plotted the downfall of the Prime Minister of the day, Harold Wilson.  After denials by Ministers, Peter Wright had finally admitted that no such plot ever existed.

Accordingly, more information will undoubtedly be released in the future about the Service: increasingly its staff are appearing as witnesses in criminal trials.  It does not have to be a wholly secret organisation, although nothing must be done to endanger its staff, its sources or its operations. 



RCA
