Podcasts about spies the rise

On this episode of Russia Rising, we’ll take a closer look at the man who has ruled over the world’s largest country for nearly two decades: Vladimir Putin was a poor kid from a tough neighbourhood who became a Russian KGB agent, a billionaire and the country’s longest-serving leader since Stalin. Along the way, he’s also been accused of committing a laundry list of atrocities. To truly understand what motivates Putin — why he does what he does — we need to know where he came from. To that end, we’ll speak with Arkady Ostrovsky, the Russian editor for the Economist magazine and Steven Lee Myers, a Putin Biographer and veteran journalist with the New York Times. We’ll explore Putin’s rapid rise to power in an interview with Jeremy Kinsman, Canada’s former ambassador to Russia. We'll also attempt to answer the question "what is Putin's motivation?" by speaking with a former KGB agent named Alexander Vassiliev. Vassiliev who was recruited by the KGB in the 1980s and attended the same spy training school at around the same time as Putin. If you enjoy Russia Rising, please take a minute to rate it on Apple Podcasts or Google Podcasts, tell us what you think and share the show with your friends. Contact: Twitter: @JeffSempleGN E-mail: RussiaRising@Curiouscast.ca Guests: Arkady Ostrovsky, Russian editor for the Economist magazine, Author of ‘The Invention of Russia’ @ArkadyOstrovsky Steven Lee Myers, New York Times Correspondent, Author of ‘The New Tsar: The Rise and Reign of Vladimir Putin’ @stevenleemyers Jeremy Kinsman, Former Canadian Ambassador to the Russian Federation Alexander Vassiliev, Former KGB Agent, Co-author of ‘Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America’ 

For decades, the American Right and Left argued about the degree to which the KGB infiltrated the U.S. political and scientific establishment. The Right said “A lot”; the Left said “Much less than you think.” Both sides did a lot of finger-pointing and, sadly, slandering. Things got very ugly. At the crux of the problem, though, was a lack of reliable information about exactly what the KGB had done and how successful (or not) they had been in recruiting Americans. That changed in the mid-1990s. The United States de-classified the results of the “Venona Project,”–an intelligence initiative that involved thesurveillanceof secret Soviet cable traffic during World War Two–and Alexander Vassiliev, a Russian journalist, made his notebooks on KGB activities in the U.S. available to researchers. For the first time, scholars such as John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehrcould measure the success of KGB spying in the U.S. during the Cold War. The results are eye-opening, as Haynes and Klehr explain in Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America (Yale University Press, 2009). Though it’s probably unwise to speak of “winners and losers” in the debate over KGB spying in the U.S., Haynes and Klehr show that the Soviets, though often bungling, had done a pretty fair job of tapping sympathetic American Leftists and stealing American secrets. That said, they also discovered that some of those the Right had accused of spying (e.g., RobertOppenheimer) were in fact innocent. This is a fascinating book and should be read by everyone interested in Cold War espionage. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For decades, the American Right and Left argued about the degree to which the KGB infiltrated the U.S. political and scientific establishment. The Right said “A lot”; the Left said “Much less than you think.” Both sides did a lot of finger-pointing and, sadly, slandering. Things got very ugly. At... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For decades, the American Right and Left argued about the degree to which the KGB infiltrated the U.S. political and scientific establishment. The Right said “A lot”; the Left said “Much less than you think.” Both sides did a lot of finger-pointing and, sadly, slandering. Things got very ugly. At the crux of the problem, though, was a lack of reliable information about exactly what the KGB had done and how successful (or not) they had been in recruiting Americans. That changed in the mid-1990s. The United States de-classified the results of the “Venona Project,”–an intelligence initiative that involved thesurveillanceof secret Soviet cable traffic during World War Two–and Alexander Vassiliev, a Russian journalist, made his notebooks on KGB activities in the U.S. available to researchers. For the first time, scholars such as John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehrcould measure the success of KGB spying in the U.S. during the Cold War. The results are eye-opening, as Haynes and Klehr explain in Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America (Yale University Press, 2009). Though it’s probably unwise to speak of “winners and losers” in the debate over KGB spying in the U.S., Haynes and Klehr show that the Soviets, though often bungling, had done a pretty fair job of tapping sympathetic American Leftists and stealing American secrets. That said, they also discovered that some of those the Right had accused of spying (e.g., RobertOppenheimer) were in fact innocent. This is a fascinating book and should be read by everyone interested in Cold War espionage. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For decades, the American Right and Left argued about the degree to which the KGB infiltrated the U.S. political and scientific establishment. The Right said “A lot”; the Left said “Much less than you think.” Both sides did a lot of finger-pointing and, sadly, slandering. Things got very ugly. At the crux of the problem, though, was a lack of reliable information about exactly what the KGB had done and how successful (or not) they had been in recruiting Americans. That changed in the mid-1990s. The United States de-classified the results of the “Venona Project,”–an intelligence initiative that involved thesurveillanceof secret Soviet cable traffic during World War Two–and Alexander Vassiliev, a Russian journalist, made his notebooks on KGB activities in the U.S. available to researchers. For the first time, scholars such as John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehrcould measure the success of KGB spying in the U.S. during the Cold War. The results are eye-opening, as Haynes and Klehr explain in Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America (Yale University Press, 2009). Though it’s probably unwise to speak of “winners and losers” in the debate over KGB spying in the U.S., Haynes and Klehr show that the Soviets, though often bungling, had done a pretty fair job of tapping sympathetic American Leftists and stealing American secrets. That said, they also discovered that some of those the Right had accused of spying (e.g., RobertOppenheimer) were in fact innocent. This is a fascinating book and should be read by everyone interested in Cold War espionage. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For decades, the American Right and Left argued about the degree to which the KGB infiltrated the U.S. political and scientific establishment. The Right said “A lot”; the Left said “Much less than you think.” Both sides did a lot of finger-pointing and, sadly, slandering. Things got very ugly. At the crux of the problem, though, was a lack of reliable information about exactly what the KGB had done and how successful (or not) they had been in recruiting Americans. That changed in the mid-1990s. The United States de-classified the results of the “Venona Project,”–an intelligence initiative that involved thesurveillanceof secret Soviet cable traffic during World War Two–and Alexander Vassiliev, a Russian journalist, made his notebooks on KGB activities in the U.S. available to researchers. For the first time, scholars such as John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehrcould measure the success of KGB spying in the U.S. during the Cold War. The results are eye-opening, as Haynes and Klehr explain in Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America (Yale University Press, 2009). Though it’s probably unwise to speak of “winners and losers” in the debate over KGB spying in the U.S., Haynes and Klehr show that the Soviets, though often bungling, had done a pretty fair job of tapping sympathetic American Leftists and stealing American secrets. That said, they also discovered that some of those the Right had accused of spying (e.g., RobertOppenheimer) were in fact innocent. This is a fascinating book and should be read by everyone interested in Cold War espionage. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices