As he was an analyst, he was aware of secret documents that had been stolen from the West. In a pinch, he could describe the source of the leak, without actually being able to positively identify the agent . This meant that the intelligence agencies then had to crosscheck their records and gradually sort through the men and women who were likely to have access to sensitive information.
If any names were revealed, even indiscriminately, before questioning the credibility of the defector, one had to consider the general wave of paranoia that was taking over at the time. Angleton, in particular, was a man who saw potential spies everywhere and Golitsyn's revelations arrived just in time to feed the frenzy. On the other hand, Golitsyn was particularly well-informed about everything relating to the Anglo-Saxon world. Although as far as France was concerned; his information was not quite as accurate, which is why the CIA wanted to pass the information on to Paris. However, they had to wait for the right time to do so. They wanted to make sure that the French government, and General de Gaulle, would suffer the greatest embarrassment, as they suspected (not without some reason), that it was too much of a docile partner in the alliance of the western countries.
Marcel Chalet
55
[The author is recalling Golitsyn's personality, having personally interrogated him in the United States.]
He was a brilliant case study of the KGB, and had undergone every stage of the initiation
process and the various levels of training that was typical of Soviet spies. Golitsyn was remarkably good at his job and given the variety of positions he had held, his powers of observation and excellent knowledge of what was happening in the West, made him an ideal informant. I think it really helped western intelligence agencies be aware of the real extent of the KGB’s reach and ambitions in the 1960s. This is certainly evident in France’s case: he helped us to understand how the KGB viewed our country as an important theatre of operations.
[Later, Chalet adds that:
He was a man of’dossiers’, not ‘the field’. It appeared from the outset that he was destined to become a first-rate informer, that is to say, someone who’s opinions would still be valid, even after he had given up all of his information. He certainly tried to maintain the image of being an expert without equal in certain areas, so as to remain as useful to the intelligence agencies, such as the CIA, for as long as possible.
[This last sentence is interesting: as a deserter, would he not be tempted to make up more secrets in order to remain useful?]
In spring 1962, John F. Kennedy sent a letter to Charles de Gaulle by special messenger - the US president wanted to make sure that the message was delivered by hand and that no one in de Gaulle's entourage would read it before the man himself. Kennedy wanted to send a signal to de Gaulle that he did have no confidence in even his closest counsellors.
Obviously, the general was not at all happy with this, even more so than with the contents of the letter itself. Yet the French President was furious : Kennedy had bluntly announced to de Gaulle that the US intelligence services had proof that France had been infiltrated right up to the highest levels by the KGB.
Even if de Gaulle thought that this might have been an effort by the Americans to sabotage his attempts at a rapprochement with Moscow, it was still difficult to treat the matter lightly. He therefore decided to send a secret emissary (an army general) to Washington. However it must be observed that neither the SDECE56 nor the DST were informed, or even the French Ambassador to the United States.
With the CIA's approval, the general met with Golitsyn and returned to Paris convinced that the defector really was in possession of very worrying information about France. Clearly troubled, de Gaulle eventually decided to send a joint team of intelligence specialists from the DST and SDECE to Washington.
This small group included a very interesting man who would later become the head of the DST, Marcel Chalet.57 He was an excellent police officer, who spoke perfect English and had a reputation for being very discerning. However, as with other counterintelligence agents, he was obsessed with the Russian infiltration that had resulted from the Resistance and even from before the Second World War, such as the Soviet spy networks similar to the Red Orchestra.58
Chalet was not the only one who believed that the men and women who made up these networks were Soviet agents before joining the Resistance or anti-fascist militants. He was also convinced that Moscow's intelligence agencies had benefitted from the
Resistance by using it to infiltrate political circles after the Liberation. Indeed, Chalet's views and beliefs often bordered on obsession.
The French ‘counterintelligence' delegation arrived in Washington and met with Golitsyn, but the DST and SDECE agents were never allowed to be alone with him. A CIA agent was always present to monitor the situation and no doubt to keep an eye on their mole.
The French talked at length with Golitsyn and obtained a very specific list of documents that were due to be delivered to the KGB by the French moles. However, Golitsyn did not give up any names. During their second trip, the French agents arrived with an impressive mass of suspicious files containing the names of numerous people who could possibly be working for the KGB. It was a far-reaching list, bringing together, for example, all public servants or politicians who had business contacts with the Soviets. It was even suggested that General de Gaulle's file was included!
By submitting these dossiers to Golitsyn, the French officials hoped
