CounterIntelligence
Stphane Lefebvre
To cite this article: Stphane Lefebvre (2011) The Czech Experience With Intelligence Reforms,
19932010, International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 24:4, 692-710, DOI:
10.1080/08850607.2011.598785
Download by: [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] Date: 02 December 2017, At: 01:53
International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 24: 692710, 2011
Copyright # Crown Copyright
ISSN: 0885-0607 print=1521-0561 online
DOI: 10.1080/08850607.2011.598785
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
STEPHANE LEFEBVRE
Upon assuming its new statehood on 1 January 1993, the Czech Republic
embarked on a journey to transform itself into an ordinary European
society and nation, its Constitution making clear that it would be a
law-abiding and democratic state founded on respect for the rights and
freedoms of its citizens.1 To reach the journeys final destination of fully
returning to Europe by joining its supranational and intergovernmental
institutions, the government gave precedence to political, social, and
economic transformations over security matters. 2 No serious public
debates informed the decisions that had to be made on the shape, form,
and functions of the countrys postCold War intelligence apparatus. The
new elites were poorly equipped to deal with securityand particularly
intelligencematters because of both their serious lack of expertise and the
more compelling competing priorities requiring their attention.
Fundamental questions were thus not answered, and very few asked: Did
the country really need an intelligence community (IC)? For what purpose?
Of what size? How powerful should it be? And under whose control? The
public, for its part, was distrustful and concerned that the intelligence
services could again be turned against them.3
RESTRUCTURING THE IC
Czechoslovakias monolithic Cold War Statn bezpecnost (StBState
Security)4 was broken up, and certain renamed legacy services emerged
prior to the proper legislation being enactedwith a reduced span of
control and responsibility. Effectiveness was an afterthought: the lines of
accountability and control were confusing, and rivalries among services
common.5 A new leadership was put in place that had no links with the
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
former StB, but they were dilettantes with good intentions.6 StB officers
sacked after the Prague Spring of 1968 were recalled and used to help
devise new intelligence policies, which were then interpreted and
implemented by the old guard of post-1968 StB officers.7 These veterans
were kept on in continually decreasing numbers until a new professional
class of intelligence officers took their place. Otherwise, the country could
not have had any credible protection.8 The new Czech Republic kept the
impetus of overcoming the legacy of Communism and remained wary of
giving too much power to any single intelligence service. Eventually, it
purged most of the StB officers, and received training assistance from the
United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Germany for
the new recruits. But former dissidents were not usually a good match for
intelligence work, and in its first ten years the Czech intelligence
community suffered some spectacular failures, registered a few
considerable successes and had its fair share of scandals, particularly in the
mid-90s.9
Lustrationthe removal of former Communists and StB collaborators
from important government positions, including intelligencewas unevenly
applied, resulting in political witchhunts and, too often, the suspension of
the presumption of innocence. Several former StB officials and
collaborators kept their employment within the intelligence community up
to the late 1990s and beyond, either under the protection of the authorities
(e.g., through the issuance of negative certificates) or by fraudulent or
deceptive means. The progressive declassification of StB files, and the
publication of the names of those who collaborated with or who were
agents of the StB, further diminishes the possibility that ex-StB members
or agents are still being employed in important positions within the
intelligence community. But, as Vaclav Havel has noted, nearly two
decades after the end of Communism, a policeman [...] is still
unconsciously seen as an enemy of the citizen.10
Areas of Concern
Fortunately, the inexperience and lack of knowledge of intelligence matters
exhibited by the new governing elites did not have dire consequences. The
security of the state was believed to be assured by international guarantees,
and by association with the rest of Europe. While no direct military threat to
the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Czech Republic developed, the
intelligence services, in their annual reports prior to the terrorist attacks of 11
September 2001 (9=11), saw a residual threat expressing itself in diverse
activitiesranging from the illicit trade in arms and narcotics, to terrorism,
militant nationalism, illegal migration, the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction, and serious economic crimes. The threat from espionage was
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
also highlighted in these reports, as Russia and a few other states quickly
became very interested in the policy orientations of the new Republic, its
control of economic assets, and its arms industry. To this day, the threat of
espionage from Russia, in particular, has not been seen as abating, with a
large presence of foreign intelligence officers and agents allegedly operating
under diplomatic status and under nontraditional cover.
Terrorism is decidedly a concern of the intelligence services but not a major
threat. The Czech Republic is a small state, and its military involvement in
Iraq and Afghanistan is not well known outside its borders. The number
of Muslim extremists on its territory is estimated to be extremely small to
nonexistent amidst a Muslim community of about 20,000 people that is
considered moderate. The intelligence services remain vigilant to all
potential sources of terrorism, conscious that their country belongs to the
West, is an ally of the United States, and offers local and foreign targets
of interest. Prior to the attacks of 9=11, the only specific and serious threat
to the Czech Republic had originated in Saddam Husseins Iraq. It
concerned an attack, which was successfully diverted, by Iraqi intelligence
operatives on the Prague building of the U.S.-funded Radio Liberty=Radio
Free Europe. Statements by the Czech Interior Minister alleging that
Mohammed Atta, one of the 9=11 hijackers, had met with an Iraqi
intelligence official in Prague prior to 9=11 were categorically rejected by
the U.S. 9=11 Commission.11
Despite the events on 9=11, and the terrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 and
London in July 2005, only a minuscule number of Czechs consider terrorism a
serious problem(two percent in spring 2005; three percent in fall 2005; and
one percent in spring 2006)at least for their country. But the Czechs seem to
recognize that terrorism is a threat to the wider European region and the
world, and as such have expressed their support to the European Unions
(EU) giving priority to the fight against terrorism (twenty-four percent in
fall 2005). This level of support may be explained by other reasonsfor
instance by the Czechs lack of confidence in the ability of their national
institutions (thirty-four percent in spring 2006) to adequately respond to the
problem, or perhaps their inadequate knowledge of the nature of the
terrorist problem and of what would be required to tackle it efficiently.12
Certainly more preoccupying for the general public are the activities of
neo-Nazis and other right-wing extremists, and of organized crime syndicates.
intelligence service[s]. CNN is enough for me.18 Michal Stikar, who worked
for the Narodn bezpecnostn urad (NBUNational Security Office) and the
Urad dokumentace a vysetrovan zlocinu komunismu (UDVOffice for the
Documentation and the Investigation of the Crimes of Communism),
characterized the interest of Czech prime ministers in intelligence as follows:
Milos Zeman dared to touch them from time to time only to observe
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
To his credit, Tosovsky picked Tomas Kadlec from the BIS to be his advisor
on intelligence matters for the duration of his caretaker administration.
Kadlec was seen by many politicians as an experienced and competent
official, although he had been among those who had criticized Devatys
leadership. When he became prime minister, Milos Zeman retained Kadlec
as his advisor on intelligence matters, but within a few weeks appointed
him NBU Director. As prime minister (20022004), Vladimr Spidla
immersed himself in the intelligence world like no other prime ministers.
He coordinated the activities of the BIS, as he had done as deputy prime
minister in Zemans government, but also coordinated the work of the
Bezpecnostn rada status (BRSNational Security Council) Vybor pro
zpravodajskou cinnost (VZCCommittee on Intelligence Activities), as
mandated by the BRS statute of August 2001. The premierships of
Stanislav Gross (20042005), Jir Paroubek (20052006), and Jan Fischer
(20092010) kept intelligence matters on the agenda, but they did not
a l w a y s u n d e r s t a n d t h e m w e l l . In c o m p a r i s o n t o hi s i m m e d i a t e
predecessors, Mirek Topolanek (20062009) was uninterested. For
instance, he did not meet once with UZSI Director Karel Randak between
winning the June 2006 elections and April 2007.
away with it. So, whats on the agenda?21 From 1993 to 1997, the Council
met on average once or twice a year without coordinating or approving
anything, and proposals to reform the Council failed to reach consensus.
Pavel Bratinka, a Minister without Portfolio, was appointed to head the
Council in July 1996, with the task of getting the Council restarted and
clarifying its powers through legislation. The Council held its first meeting
under Bratinkas leadership that September, and its second meeting a
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
Coordinating Activities
The same month, President Vaclav Havel suggested that the BSR take over
the coordination of the intelligence services, given that it had responsibilities
information. At the 25 April 2000 meeting of the BRS, the Council finally
ended its business, and on 3 May the government accepted the BRSs
recommendation to create the VZC, whose meetings are chaired by the
Prime Minister.
In preparation for the 2002 Prague NATO Summit, representatives of the
Police, the intelligence services, and of the Interior and Foreign Affairs
ministries began meeting to coordinate their activities and exchange
intelligence on terrorism, illegal immigration, and organized crime. The
ad hoc group met again when the tension around the impending United
States invasion of Iraq arose in early 2003, and on the day of the July
2005 terrorist bombing attacks in London. A week prior to the London
event, the Prague government had wisely decided to give a more
permanent footing to this interagency grouping, now known as the
Spolecne zpravodajske skupiny (SZSJoint Intelligence Group), as a
permanent VZC working body. That month, the government also
authorized the development of a new classified communication system that
would link, inter alia, the Government Office, the Defense, Foreign
Affairs, and Interior ministries, the NBU, BIS, and UZSI.
On the 2006 anniversary of 9=11, newly elected Prime Minister Topolanek
made the fight against terrorism a priority of his right-of-center
government, and aimed at improving coordination among the intelligence
services. He believed that pooling all terrorism-related intelligence in a
single place for its assessment and dissemination was a good idea,
although it had been broached by his left-of-center predecessor in the
form of a proposal for a counterterrorism center. Such a center,
promoted by Interior Minister Frantisek Bublan (20042006) and UZSI
(which Bublan headed 20012004), would have had some 3050 officials
from the ranks of the police and intelligence services to conduct all-source
intelligence analysis and coordinate cooperation with foreign services. The
Police supported the idea, but wanted to take the lead in setting up the
center. But the new Interior Minister, Ivan Langer (20062009), was not
convinced that the government should move so quickly, and was
sceptical about the idea of a separate police unit.25 In any event, plans
for a counterrorism center were not implemented that year. On 13
September, Topolaneks cabinet tasked the BIS Director to act as
coordinator of the fight against terrorism, and in so doing to collect,
Combining Forces
Sporadically after 9=11, the debate on the number of intelligence services the
Czech Republic should have, and in what configuration, would reignite. In
2006, Topolanek would use the issue as an excuse to remove from his
leadership position UZSIs Director, Karel Randak (20042006). 27
Randaks dismissal coincided with the governments announcement that it
had tasked the BRS to report by 31 October on a detailed proposal on the
future organization of the intelligence services. The government was
already eyeing a merger of the UZSI with the BIS, and prematurely
appointed BIS Director Jir Lang (2003) to head the joint service yet to
be created. (Randak remained employed with UZSI and served as Langs
advisor until he left public service on 31 March 2007).28
The VZC, however, did not report until May 2007, when it concluded
t h a t t h e U Z S I a n d t h e B I S s h o u l d n o t m e r g e . I n s t e a d , i t s
STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS
Narodn Bezpecnostn urad (NBUNational Security Office)
The NBU, though not classified as one of the Czech Republics intelligence
agencies, is intrinsically linked to intelligence. Created by the Act on the
Protection of Classified Information which took effect in 1998, the NBU
is responsible for granting access to classified information to government
officials after they have been successfully vetted on the basis of
information provided by the intelligence agencies and other criteria, as
stipulated in the Act, and for acting as the national technical authority
for the protection of classified information. The NBUs Director has the
final decision on the granting of a security clearance certificate to
government employees, with the exception of the intelligence services and
the Interior Ministry, which can grant certificates to their own employees.
In 2001, the Constitutional Court ruled that not allowing individuals to
contest the NBUs decisions was unconstitutional, and an infringement of
the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedom. The government
Pavel Kolar, kept his job for only a few weeks. With the opposition
winning the 1998 elections, he was quickly dismissed and replaced by
Tomas Kadlec. Kadlec faced a lot of criticism over the time required to
screen security clearance applicants (2,500 applicants out of 18,000 were
cleared during the NBUs first year). The government realized that the
high number of applicants exceeded capacity, and had a severe financial
impact on the NBU and the intelligence services.31 To rectify the situation,
the government decided to amend the law to allow the intelligence services
and the Interior Ministry to screen their own employees and to draft a
regulation reducing the scope of people needing a security clearance.
In May 2003, the lingering disputes between the NBU and the BIS led
Kadlec and BIS Director Jir Ruzek to tender their resignations to Prime
Minister Spidla. Kadlecs Deputy and successor, Jan Mares, conducted an
internal audit on the certificates issued between 1999 and 2002, finding
that the NBU was too lenient in granting certificates to former StB
collaborators or agents in cases where their files were assumed to have
been destroyed. The audit further noted that file management was lax,
with signatures, dates, and decision rationales often missing. And, in some
cases, applicants were evaluated by an intelligence service having
insufficient information to do a proper assessment (e.g., the UZSI instead
of the BIS). Kadlec, who headed the NBU during the period covered by
the audit, told reporters that he had at times been under pressure by
politicians to grant certificates. Mares, too, found himself in trouble. He
resigned in February 2006 after being heard on a wiretap discussing access
to the Presidential Office with Judge Jir Berka, who had been indicted for
corruption in connection with fraudulent bankruptcies. Mares had also
been slow in firing a protege who had been connected to an alleged
underworld figure.
Police officer Petr Hostek replaced Mares shortly before the June 2006
parliamentary elections. Hostek wanted to stabilize the NBU, and keep it
out of the news media. Understanding that his appointment so close to the
elections would make it a temporary one, he tendered his resignation to
Prime Minister Topolanek in September. He was eventually replaced by
BIS Deputy Director Dusan Navratil, a former NBU Deputy Director.
Navratil has kept a low profile, not granting his first media interview until
twenty months after taking office.
.
. threats to the protection of classified information;
. threats to the security or important economic interests of the Czech Republic; and
. organized crime and terrorism.
allied intelligence services.35 Its small size and budget do not allow the UZSI
to have or place a high number of human sources abroad. Because the BIS is
generally seen as the premier Czech intelligence service, the UZSI is often
afflicted by a lack of political=government direction and interest for its
intelligence operations and products.
UZSIs Director is appointed and dismissed by the Interior Minister upon
government approval. He is therefore directly accountable to the Minister,
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
but the UZSI remains an independent state entity receiving only certain
services from the Ministry. This means that the Minister cannot task the
UZSI himself, as only the government as a whole can. The UZSIs budget,
however, is a part of the Ministrys budget. The Foreign Ministry is the
UZSIs primary customer and recipient of its reports and analyses. Given
the UZSIs particular reporting construct, its relationship with the Foreign
Ministry took about a half-decade to cement.36
The UZSIs early leadership was criticized for its lack of relevant
experience. Its first Director, Oldrich Cerny (19931998), and one of his
key deputies, Rudolf Ruzicka, were men of letters closely associated with
President Havel. Although Cernys tenure was relatively quiet, in 1997 he
faced two crises (the loss of a laptop containing service information and
allegations of financial improprieties by his staff) that forced him to
tender his resignation, which was turned down by Interior Minister
Ruml. 37 A few weeks after the July 1998 elections, Cerny resigned.
Zemans new government appointed the head of the BIS School, Petr
Zeman (19982001), to succeed him. In early 2001, he resigned for health
reasons, and was replaced by another BIS veteran, Frantisek Bublan
(20012004). Bublans tenure proved to be uncontroversial. After he was
named Interior Minister-designate in mid-2004 by the new Prime
Minister, Stanislav Gross, he emphasized the need for the various
intelligence services to improve their sharing of intelligence. Although the
services were believed to closely cooperate, too often, he noted, the
sharing of relevant intelligence happened after an event had occurred. As
incoming Interior Minister, Bublan expressed his intention of
interconnecting the intelligence databases maintained by each service. He
was succeeded as UZSI Director by his operations deputy and yet
another BIS veteran, Karel Randak. In May 2007, after the Lang
interregnum (20062007), Ivo Schwarz, UZSIs Deputy Director since
2003, was appointed Director.
OVERSIGHT
The Czech intelligence services do not operate independently from any
vertical or horizontal accountability. They are vertically accountable to the
executive level of government, and their activities and powers subject to
Acts of Parliament. While vertical accountability is regularly asserted, it is
a necessary but insufficient condition to ensure that intelligence services
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
DISCORD CONTINUES
Throughout most of its existence, the Czech intelligence community has been
subjected to half-hearted, poorly thought out attempts at reform,
coordination, and cooperation which have compounded the animosity that
developed early on among the various intelligence services, in particular
between the BIS and the UZSI. Despite the creation of the VZC, the
institutionalization of the SZS, and the establishment of the
counterterrorism center, a lack of communication among the agencies
involved in the fight against terrorism continues to be a problem. The
situation was again explicitly recognized in a report approved by the
government in March 2010. An action plan to improve communication,
encourage research and education on national security issues, and better
inform the general public was subsequently developed. These steps are
essential for the continuing development of an effective and accountable
Czech intelligence community.
REFERENCES
1
Rick Fawn, The Czech Republic: A Nation of Velvet (Amsterdam: Harwood
Academic Publishers, 2000), pp. xixii.
2
On the strategic culture that emerged in the new Czech Republic, see Stephane
Lefebvre, The Czech Republic and National Security, 19931998: The
Emergence of a Strategic Culture, Journal of Slavic Military Studies, Vol. 23,
No. 2, 2010, pp. 328369.
3
Petr Zeman, The Transformation of the Intelligence Services, in
Transformation: The Czech Experience (Prague: People in Need, 2006),
pp. 121122.
4
The StB played an essential role in sustaining the Czechoslovak Communist
regime, which used it to divide and conquer in a world where everything
was political. After the Warsaw Pact intervention in 1968, the Communist
regime increased its oppression of dissidents and its effort in weeding out the
politically unreliable, measures that lasted until the very end. Vaclav Havel,
To the Castle and Back (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007), pp. 4, 5455.
Quotation from p. 62.
5
Greg Hannah, Kevin A. OBrien, and Andrew Rathmell, Intelligence and
Security Legislation for Security Sector Reform, Technical Report (Santa
Monica: RAND Corporation, 2005), pp. 2830; Larry L. Watts, Intelligence
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
17
Oldrich Cerny, Czechoslovak (Czech) Intelligence After the Cold War, p. 8. It
is also the view of Tomas Kadlec, who headed the economic section of the
Security Information Service (BIS) (19921998) and the National Security
Office (NBU) (19982003), Euro, 22 October 2007.
18
Tyden, 8 December, 1997.
19
Mlada fronta Dnes, 29 October 2007.
20
Chaired by the Prime Minister, its members included the minister of defense,
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
validly argued that the cut would affect the BISs ability to conduct security
clearances investigations in a timely manner.
32
Civic Democratic Alliance (ODA) leader Jan Kalvoda (in January 1994),
Christian Democratic Union-Czech Peoples Party (KDU-CSL) leader Josef
Lux (in November 1996), and Czech Social Democratic Party (CSSD) leader
and Chairman of the Chamber of Deputies Milos Zeman (opposition; also in
November 1996) all alleged that the BIS had been monitoring politicians.
Downloaded by [FNSP Fondation National des Sciences Politiques] at 01:53 02 December 2017
33
Prior to his appointment, he was the head of the radioisotope laboratory at
Charles Universitys Faculty of Medicine.
34
In December 2003, information surfaced that Ruzek had ordered surveillance of
UZSIs training center but that it was quickly discovered. His motive was
apparently related to recent departures of BIS staff to UZSI and his desire to
prevent any further departure. Lang apparently was not aware of this
operation while Ruzeks deputy director, and agreed with UZSI Director
Bublan that their services should not engage in such activities against one another.
35
Pravo, 19 January 2006.
36
Petr Zeman, The Transformation of the Intelligence Services, p. 123.
37
StB members who had been purged from UZSI in 1996 were believed to be behind
these disclosures.
38
The notion of vertical and horizontal accountability is from Marina Caparini,
Controlling and Overseeing Intelligence Services in Democratic States, in
Democratic Control of Intelligence Services: Containing Rogue Elephants, Hans
Born and Marina Caparini, eds. (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2007), pp. 324.