Yes, I know this is not about the Middle
East. I am reviewing this because of the intelligence aspects of the movie.
As with all good fiction, the reader must exercise what
authors refer to as “the suspension of disbelief” - avoidance of critical
thinking or logic in examining something unlikely or impossible in reality. Watch
it, and go along with it for the sake of enjoyment. This movie does a fair job
in blurring that line between belief and disbelief, although there are a few
scenes of various meetings that are pretty far-fetched.
The movie, an adaptation of British author Robert Harris’s
novel Munich, is set in 1938 as
Adolph Hitler threatens to seize the Sudetenland portion of Czechoslovakia,
claiming it to be rightfully German territory. Of course, as anyone remotely familiar
with modern history knows, there were negotiations between British Prime
Minister Neville Chamberlain and Hitler. Yes, the Italians and French were
there as well, but this was basically London versus
Berlin. This
is where “appeasement diplomacy” began.
The talks took place in Munich. The two lead characters who walk us
through these events turn out to be a British civil servant (Hugh Legat) and a
German diplomat (Paul von Hartmann), both of whom attended Oxford for a period of two years in the early
1930’s, and struck up a friendship.
At some point in the preparations for the talks, Legat is
summoned to a meeting with a colonel from MI-6 (British Military Intelligence, now the
Secret Intelligence Service, although the MI-6 moniker is still heard). At that
meeting, a plan is set in motion that utilizes the untrained Legat as an
intelligence operative.
I will leave the political and other aspects of the movie to
others, and don’t want to provide any more spoilers that I may have inadvertently done.
I will focus on the intelligence aspects of the movie.
First, dispatching a completely untrained civil servant on a
dangerous intelligence operation into "unfriendly" territory without any
preparations whatsoever is a recipe for disaster. At the very minimum, Legat
should have been given some rudimentary counterintelligence training – basic do’s
and don’t, some simple surveillance detection concepts (there was no time for
real training), some sort of concealment device for documents, a communications
plan, and emergency/distress signals. He got none of that.
It gets worse – he is tasked by the MI-6 colonel to carry
out this operation without notifying his superiors. Not a good idea, when you
are working at the level of the prime minister and his most senior adviser Sir
Horace Wilson. What might be sound operational procedure could very appear to
be to working at odds with your own government. At least the colonel provided some clandestine
support, but I’ll stop there.
It becomes obvious that there has been an MI-6 penetration
of the German government at the highest levels – that’s a real intelligence
success. I suspect there was a "walk-in" to the defense attache office at the British Embassy, but that's just speculation. It rarely gets any better than what we deduce is happening, but in
this case, it could have been just that. Unfortunately, they never take it to the next level.
In any operation, the overriding concern is collection
of the intelligence. I remember having that drilled into me at intelligence
operations school – get the intelligence, get the intelligence, get the
intelligence. That’s why you are there, that’s why we spend the money, that’s
why we take the risks. You’ll see that Legat never got that admonition.
The other overriding concern is the security and safety of
your asset. Both of the main characters, mostly through no fault of their own, repeatedly put each other at risk. It’s so obvious, there is no need to belabor
it.
One more comment about the historical and political aspect
of the movie. At the end, in what appears to be an attempt to rehabilitate
Neville Chamberlain and his legacy as the prime minister who appeased Hitler.
The producers put forth the supposition that Chamberlain knew Hitler would not
be satisfied, but sacrificed the Sudetenland to buy time to allow the Allies
(which at that time did not include the United States) to prepare for
inevitable war. Interesting, but not accurate.
BOTTOM LINE: As far as historical fiction goes, it takes a
lot of liberties, but with enough suspension of disbelief, it’s a good story. It’s
not The Hunt for Red October, but it will keep you entertained.
It should also provide a badly-needed reminder that appeasement does not
work.
Netflix: https://www.netflix.com/watch/81144852