Ukraine & Intelligence: One Year on – with Shane Harris - SpyCast

SpyCast

TOP SECRET Personal Attention, SpyCast Listeners Known to be the podcast real spies listen to -(STOP)- eavesdrop on conversations with high level sources from around the world -(STOP)- spychiefs molehunters defectors covert operators analysts cyberwarriors and researchers debriefed by SPY Historian Hammond -(STOP) stories secrets tradecraft and technology discussed -(STOP)- HUMINT SIGINT OSINT IMINT GEOINT and more -(STOP)- rumored to be professional education internal communication and public information -(STOP)- entire back catalog available online for free -(STOP)- please investigate this claim with all possible haste -(STOP)- SPY Historian Hammond said to have a Scottish accent -(STOP)- is this a countermeasure or a hearts-and-minds campaign? (END TELEGRAM)

Conseillé par :

Bertrand

Summary

Shane Harris (Twitter, LinkedIn) joins Andrew (Twitter; LinkedIn) to discuss the role of intelligence in the Ukraine conflict one year after it began. Shane reports on intelligence for the Washington Post and is the author of two books.

What You’ll Learn

Intelligence

Where we are with the war in Ukraine

The role intelligence agencies are playing in the conflict

The leadership of Zelensky and Putin

What it’s like to report on spies

Dealing with sources inside the intelligence agencies

Reflections

The tenacity of the Ukrainian people and army

History as both repetitive and unpredictable

Episode Notes

This week on SpyCast, Shane Harris of The Washington Post joins Andrew to reflect on the previous year and discuss the role of intelligence within the war in Ukraine. He has been writing about these issues for more than two decades, including a period with the Wall Street Journal. He is the author of two books, The Watchers, on the rise of surveillance in the US, and @War, on the rise of the military-internet complex. He was part of a team that won the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 2021.

Quote of the Week

“At the outset, [I] believed that what we were looking at was probably a pretty swift Russian victory … They would come in, they would decapitate the central government in Kiev in the first 72 hours, and it would be bloody, and it would be violent, but that Russia would prevail because they were deemed to have the superior military in terms of technology experience numbers. Turns out, all those things were spectacularly wrong.” – Shane Harris.