Difference between revisions of "The Clandestine Caucus"

From Powerbase
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
The Clandestine Caucus 
 
  
Part 1
 
 
==Clearing the ground: the unions, socialism and the state==
 
 
A surprising number of Labour Party members believe
 
that it was once a socialist party, began as a
 
socialist party, and was then seduced from the golden
 
pathway. This engenders the language of betrayal and
 
sell-out which is so familiar and depressing a part of
 
life in the Labour Party and on the British Left in
 
general.(1) But the view of the Labour Party as
 
originally socialist is just wrong. The history of
 
Britain's union and labour movement is one of
 
continuous conflict between socialist and
 
anti-socialist wings; and within that conflict the bit
 
of the story that is usually not told is that
 
describing the relationship between the anti-socialist
 
section of the labour movement and British and US
 
capital and their states.
 
 
The conflict between the anti- and pro-socialist wings
 
of the labour movement sharpened markedly after the
 
1918 Bolshevik revolution and the subsequent formation
 
of the Communist Party of Great Britain. Although we
 
have surprisingly little information on the turbulent
 
years between 1918 and 1926, and, in particular, on
 
the British Right's preparation to meet the Bolshevik
 
'threat',(2) we know that much of the early effort was
 
put into groups aimed at the exploitation of so-called
 
'patriotic labour', such as the British Workers
 
League.(3)
 
 
World War 1 produced the modern British state - the
 
Cabinet Office etc. - and mobilisation: things were
 
run from the centre and new relationships were formed.
 
 
:'By the end of 1919, a new form of political activity
 
was growing up, as yet only half understood, but
 
radically different from the pre-war system ..... but
 
there now existed formal, powerful, employers'
 
institutions, a fully fledged Ministry of Labour, and
 
a TUC [Trades Union Congress] increasingly accustomed
 
to dealing in the political arena, wedded to a major
 
political party which, almost alone in Europe,
 
encompassed the majority of the non-Conservative
 
working class. At the same time, the government's
 
apparatus for manipulating public opinion had grown
 
inordinately, enabling it - on its own estimate - to
 
confront the spectre of Bolshevism and survive. Lloyd
 
George himself, searching always for a middle way in
 
politics, had shifted away from Liberal radicalism
 
towards a corporatism best described as the creation
 
in Parliamentary politics of a staatspartei, composed
 
of Liberals and mainstream Conservatives (leaving a
 
fringe right wing and a much larger, but powerless
 
Labour Left); complemented in industrial politics by a
 
triangular collaboration in which employers'
 
organisations and TUC should make them-selves
 
representative of their members and in return receive
 
recognition as estates by government.'(4)
 
 
The [[British Commonwealth Union]], the FBI ([[Federation of
 
British Industry]], precursor of today's CBI) and the
 
other predominantly Midlands manufacturing group, the
 
[[National Union of Manufacturers]], were set up during
 
the first World War and they mark the origins of the
 
British corporate movement.(5) One of the leading
 
figures of the group, Sir [[Dudley Docker]], envisaged
 
 
:'a completely integrated society and economy in which
 
industry would have its organisation of workers and
 
management, the two sets of organisations united by
 
peak federations and all finally capped by a great
 
national forum of workers and managers and employers,
 
embraced by the protection of an Imperial Tariff.'(6)
 
 
Another of the corporatist groups financed by Midlands
 
industrialists, the [[British Commonwealth Union]] (BCU),
 
led by the Birmingham MP, Sir [[Patrick Hannon]], began
 
funding MPs to form an Industrial Group in Parliament.
 
The first 11 candidates were subsidised by the BCU in
 
the 1918 election: by 1924 the group in parliament
 
consisted of 105 (mostly Tory) members. Hannon's
 
Industrial Group chiefly wanted government protection
 
of British industry against foreign competition, but,
 
to quote Hannon, they also 'wanted the largest measure
 
of freedom in the relationship between capital and
 
labour and the least state intervention possible.'(7)
 
 
These early corporatist dreams failed for a number of
 
reasons. Employer organisations were none too happy at
 
the idea of the trade unions as some kind of
 
partners.(8) And vice versa. Too much was being
 
expected; it was too big a change, happening too
 
quickly. In any case, the corporatists among the
 
members of the [[Federation of British Industries]] (FBI)
 
were a minority strand in the thinking of the Tory
 
Party and British industrial capital; and even among
 
the corporatists there were divisions.(9)
 
 
Frank Longstreth called this network of BCU,
 
Industrial Group, FBI and other employer propaganda
 
groups of the period, such as the [[Economic League]], the
 
Preference Imperialists, and noted their links to the
 
earlier Midlands manufacturing-based Tariff Reform
 
League.(10)As Longstreth suggested, it is possible to
 
view the British economy since 1900 as a protracted
 
struggle between British manufacturing (domestic
 
capital) and the City of London (international finance
 
capital), with the City in control for most of the
 
century.(11) [[Oswald Mosley]]'s movement in the 1930s was
 
 
:'in effect, the perverted continuation of the social
 
imperialism of an earlier generation of
 
industrialists, supporting imperial autarchy, social
 
reform, conversion from a bankers' to a producers'
 
economy, protectionism, public control of credit, and
 
the suppression of the class struggle through the
 
state'.(12)
 
 
Although the great schemes of corporatism failed, the
 
cooperation between the state and the trade unions
 
which began during the First World War, continued
 
after the General Strike and was deepened by the first
 
two Labour governments.(13) Peter Weiler quotes Ernest
 
Bevin's view in the 1930s that that the TUC had
 
'virtually become an integral part of the State, its
 
views and voice upon every subject, international and
 
domestic, heard and heeded.'(14) This statement of
 
Bevin's is an exaggeration: no doubt the TUC's views
 
were heard; but heeded?
 
 
The powers-that-be set about educating and socialising
 
these new leaders. In 1938, for example, one of the
 
most important of the trade union leaders, Ernest
 
Bevin, with his wife, was taken off on a tour of the
 
empire, at the behest of the Royal Institute of
 
International Affairs.(15) Trade union leaders they
 
might be, seeking justice and a better deal for the
 
British worker, but they remained patriots and
 
imperialists for the most part, and not socialists.
 
The gentlemen (mostly men) of the TUC did not dream -
 
publicly or secretly - of taking over British
 
capitalism, or of destroying the British empire. The
 
institutional links with the British state begun
 
before World War 2 were solidified enormously by the
 
war. The trade unions were in the national coalition
 
government, and some of their leaders were Ministers
 
of the Crown - very important people.
 
 
 
After the war
 
In the immediate post-war period the TUC was dominated
 
by what Lewis Minkin called a 'praetorian guard'
 
against the left; Arthur Deakin of the Transport
 
Workers, Will Lawther of the Mineworkers and Tom
 
Williamson of the General and Municipal. Minkin
 
describes in detail how this trio ran the what he
 
calls 'an unprecedented period of "platform" dominance
 
at Party conference';(16) but noted that this alliance
 
was defensive in nature and saw a communist conspiracy
 
behind all criticism.
 
 
The political beliefs of the leaders of trade unions
 
in this period was mixed. Some were supporters of
 
Moral Rearmament (MRA). At the 1947 MRA World Assembly
 
at Caux-sur-Martreux in France, delegates from Britain
 
included E.G. Gooch MP, President of the Agricultural
 
Workers. An MRA press release on October 15, 1947
 
noted that signatories to a message of support for the
 
Caux assembly included trade union leaders Andrew
 
Naesmith, (General Secretary of the Amalgamated
 
Weavers' Association), G. H. Bagnall (TUC General
 
Council representative; former General Secretary of
 
the National Union of Dyers, Bleachers and Textile
 
Workers), George Chester (General Secretary of the
 
National Union of Boot and Shoe Operatives), W. B.
 
Beard and J. W. Stephenson (Chair of Building Trade
 
Operatives).Some trade union leaders supported
 
campaigns by avowedly anti-socialist groups such as
 
Aims of Industry and the Economic League. In 1952 the
 
New Statesman reported that recent Aims of Industry
 
literature had included essays by - or under the name
 
of, perhaps - Florence Hancock of the TUC General
 
Council and Bob Edwards, the General Secretary of the
 
Chemical Workers' Union, who was later to be found on
 
the Advisory Council of the anti-communist
 
organisation, Common Cause.(17)
 
 
 
The Trades Union Congress and the state
 
Bevin's 'integration' into the British state meant a
 
role for the TUC in the overseas state, the empire, as
 
well as in Britain itself; and before and during the
 
war the TUC began working with the Foreign and
 
Colonial offices - a relationship about which few
 
trade unionists knew - or know - anything at all.(18)
 
As one of the Colonial Office officials quoted by
 
Weiler said, with the clarity of simpler times, the
 
TUC could be relied upon to guide young trade unions
 
in the empire into becoming
 
 
 
'trades unions which the employers in the colony would
 
feel they could respect and trust and which could be
 
relied upon loyally to keep an agreement.'(19)
 
 
In 1948, a member of the US State Department, Third
 
Secretary at the London Embassy, Herbert E. Weiner,
 
reported from London on 'Attitude of Trades Union
 
Congress Towards World Federation of Trade Unions and
 
American International Trade Union Leaders', and
 
wrote:
 
 
 
'When asked how the Trades Union Congress hoped to
 
prevent the Communists from using the technique of
 
bona fide forms of trade union action in order to
 
infiltrate unions in Germany and in "undeveloped"
 
(colonial) areas, my informant said ........:in areas
 
where trade unionism is undeveloped e.g. colonial
 
areas, the Trades Union Congress through the British
 
Labour Attaches keeps in close touch with Communist
 
union activities'.(20)
 
 
 
In the 1970s the TUC seconded two of its international
 
staff to the Foreign Office. This caused a minor
 
furore when it was brought to the attention of the TUC
 
members.(21) Alan Hargreaves, TUC International
 
Secretary in the 1970s, came to the TUC from the
 
Foreign Office and refused to discuss his Foreign
 
Office work.(22)
 
 
Attacked by the socialists - and communists - on the
 
left at home, and working against the left abroad with
 
the Colonial and Foreign Offices, little wonder that
 
the TUC slipped so comfortably into the Cold War role
 
allotted to it.
 
 
 
Notes
 
Please note: details of the books and articles cited
 
in these footnotes are in the bibliography at the end
 
of the essay, indexed by author's surname.
 
 
 
1. There is wide-spread confusion about whether or not
 
to capitalise the 'L' in left or the 'R' in right. I
 
will try to stick to this rule: capital letters only
 
when proper nouns; thus British Left and the left.
 
2. Or am I being naive to be surprised that the one
 
period in British twentieth history when there may
 
have been something like a pre-revolutionary climate
 
seems under researched? Stephen White, in 1975,
 
offered a glimpse
 
of a dense hinterland of largely short-lived parties
 
and groups forming on the right in Britain in this
 
period. Stephen White, 'Ideological Hegemony and
 
Political Control: the sociology of anti-Bolshevism
 
1918-1920' in Scottish Labour History Society Journal,
 
No. 98, June 1975. See also Webber 1987, and John
 
Hope's 'Fascism, the Security Service and the Curious
 
Career of Maxwell Knight and James McGuirk Hughes' in
 
Lobster 22.
 
3. See, for example. 'In The Excess of Their
 
Patriotism: the National Party and Threats of
 
Subversion' by Chris Wrigley in Wrigley (ed.). Of the
 
groups which appeared in this period only the Economic
 
League survived into Mrs Thatcher's era.
 
4. Middlemas p. 151.
 
5. This mirrored what was happening elsewhere in
 
Europe, notably Germany and Italy. See, for example,
 
Scott Newton's 'The economic background to appeasement
 
and the search for Anglo-German detente before and
 
during World War 2', in Lobster 20.
 
6. Blank p. 14
 
7. Farr, thesis, p. 179. See also Wrigley, 'In The
 
Excess' pp. 108 and 9, and 'Sir Allan Smith, the
 
Industrial Group and the Politics of Unemployment
 
1919-24' by Terence Rodgers, in Davenport-Hines (ed.).
 
8. Ibid. pp. 222-5
 
9. Patrick Hannon's abortive attempt to create an
 
Industrial Group of MPs and union leaders using the
 
British Commonwealth Union is in Barbara Lee Farr's
 
thesis. Her information came from the Hannon papers in
 
the House of Lords. I was alerted to this remarkable
 
piece of work by John Hope.
 
 
Rodgers, in note 7, does not cite Farr's work and
 
gives slightly different figures for the size of the
 
Industrial Group of MP's, while quoting the same
 
source, namely the Hannon papers. See his footnotes 13
 
and 16. Hannon's obituary appeared in The Times, 11
 
January 1963.
 
10. Frank Longstreth, 'The City, Industry and the
 
State' in Crouch (ed.).
 
11. See, for example, Newton and Porter.
 
12. Longstreth, ibid. p. 171.
 
13. This is a major theme of the Alan Bulloch
 
biography of Ernest Bevin, for example.
 
14. Weiler p. 19
 
15. I discussed this in Lobster 28, p. 11.
 
16. Minkin, Contentious Alliance, p. 83
 
17. New Statesman, 12 January 1952. See also H.H.
 
Wilson, 'Techniques of Pressure - Anti-Nationalisation
 
Propaganda' in Public Opinion Quarterly, Summer 1951.
 
Edwards' obituary in The Independent, 25 June 1990
 
noted that he had been a member of the ILP and was an
 
enemy of the Communist Party. His was thus an
 
improbable name on the list of labour movement figures
 
who had allegedly helped the KGB supplied by former
 
KGB officer Oleg Gordievsky. See Gordievsky pp. 286
 
and 7.
 
18. 'At least since the foundation of the
 
International Affairs Department, TUC staff have kept
 
close contact with the Foreign Office, a practice
 
which persists to the present day.' Harrod p. 105. The
 
study by Marjorie Nicholson of this subject does not
 
mention the International Affairs Department, though
 
as Anthony Carew pointed out, this may tell us nothing
 
as she worked in the Colonial/Commonwealth Department.
 
For a more critical view see Peter Weiler, chapter 1.
 
19. Ibid. p. 29
 
20. My thanks to John Booth for this document. On the
 
origins of this see Majorie Nicholson, chapter 6,
 
especially pp. 209-11, and Weiler chapter 1.
 
21. See Thompson and Larson pp. 27-8, and New
 
Statesman, 16 November, 1979, 'FO reinforces TUC
 
links', for two examples. I do not know if this
 
practice pre-dates the 1970s.
 
22. See the New Statesman, 20 April 1979 for the TUC's
 
response, and 'TUC's foreign policy' by Patrick
 
Wintour, New Statesman, 2 March 1979.
 
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
 
U.S. influence after the war
 
I do not want to re-run the long debate about the
 
origins of the Cold War or - in particular - the
 
causes of the break-up of the World Federation of
 
Trade Unions (WFTU) in 1949, except to say that it is
 
pretty clear now, with this much hindsight, that by
 
then the British trade union leaders were determined
 
to break the WFTU - whatever the Soviet bloc had done
 
- and this would have been pushed through, supported
 
by the Americans.(23) As Dennis MacShane MP
 
demonstrates in his book,(24) the European social
 
democratic trade union movement was not going to
 
coexist with the Soviet bloc, either. If the USA
 
leaned on the door, as Peter Weiler and what might
 
loosely be called 'the left' believe, it was half open
 
already - and was never going to shut again. Into this
 
domestic anti-communist climate came the USA's loans -
 
and the people and ideas, the strings attached to the
 
money.
 
 
From the first request from Churchill for clandestine
 
assistance before America had officially entered the
 
war, the US 'aid' had come with strings attached.
 
Despite his famous remark that he had not taken office
 
to oversee the destruction of His Majesty's empire,
 
Churchill had actually done precisely that to pay for
 
the war: and the process continued after it. It was
 
left to some of the Tory Right and some of the Labour
 
Left - the same groups that are still sceptical of the
 
European Union - to oppose the acceptance of the
 
conditions attached to the post-war US loans.
 
 
 
The Council on Foreign Relations
 
Planning for the US takeover of the countries of
 
non-communist Europe was done, during the war, in the
 
Council on Foreign Relations, the informal,
 
semi-secret, think tank-cum-social club of the East
 
Coast elite - the bankers, the lawyers and managers of
 
US international capital.(25) But when the war ended
 
the details had not been worked out, and there was
 
significant domestic opposition to be taken into
 
consideration. The result was that in the chaos of the
 
post-war years the American 'interventionists', as
 
Pisani calls them, had to improvise.(26) The
 
'coordination of public and private efforts was
 
achieved by using the Council on Foreign Relations
 
(CFR) as a clearing house for projects'.(27) It was
 
CFR personnel, for example, who raised money to
 
intervene in the Italian elections of 1947.(28) And in
 
the immediate post-war years the political
 
interventionist picture is complicated: there was
 
nothing like the clear-cut overt/covert dichotomy
 
which we think characterised US foreign policy when
 
things settled down into the State Department/ CIA mix
 
perceived after the sixties.(29)
 
 
 
The Economic Cooperation Agency
 
At the most overt level, there was the Economic
 
Cooperation Agency (ECA) which doled out the dollars
 
in support of what is known as multilateral trade:
 
that is, the ECA sought to break down barriers against
 
American goods. A former acting head of the ECA said
 
that:
 
 
 
'In everything we did we sought to change or to
 
strengthen opinions - opinions about how to build free
 
world strength, about America's role, cooperative
 
effort by Europeans, investment, productivity, fiscal
 
stability, trade measurement, industrial competition,
 
free labour unions etc.'(30)
 
 
But ECA also had what we would call a covert arm and
 
ran psychological warfare operations.(31) In France,
 
 
 
'The ECA mission chief wore two hats. He was the
 
conduit for economic assistance and defense
 
mobilisation, as well as for psychological and
 
economic warfare components provided by the Office of
 
Policy Coordination (OPC).'(32)
 
 
As part of that psychological warfare programme, for
 
example, the ECA persuaded the British TUC to produce
 
- a least put its name to - a report on productivity
 
subsequently used all over Europe. 'The ECA mission in
 
London distributed a large number of copies abroad,
 
urged its translation into foreign languages and
 
prepared numerous press releases and feature articles
 
for planting in the British and foreign press.' The US
 
London Embassy's Labour Information Officer William
 
Gausmann reported that 'from a trade union point of
 
view, this is the most valuable document that has been
 
produced under ECA auspices to date.'(33)
 
 
 
The Office of Policy Coordination (OPC)
 
The OPC, the first of the euphemistic cover names of
 
US covert action agencies in the post-war era, was
 
formed in 1948, staffed and run by the newly created
 
CIA but nominally under the control of the State
 
Department. In effect the CIA's covert arm, by 1952
 
the OPC had forty-seven stations, 2,812 staff and a
 
budget of $84 million.(34) Much of this growth had
 
been funded by money from the Marshall Plan.(35) What
 
we now think of as the CIA, that is the covert
 
operation, intervention arm of US multi-national
 
capital - the post-war bogey man supreme for the left
 
- began as the enforcement arm of the Marshall Plan,
 
engaged in operations against the left and the trade
 
unions of Europe, communist or non-communist. The OPC
 
was the US administration's recognition that the ECA
 
alone couldn't 'get the job done'.(36)
 
 
 
Labour Attaches
 
Another weapon in the post-war US armoury was the
 
Labour Attache programme which was established towards
 
the end of the war. In the words of one its creators,
 
Philip Kaiser, 'the labor attache is expected to
 
develop contacts with key leaders in the trade union
 
movement, and to influence their thinking and
 
decisions in directions compatible with American
 
goals....' (Emphasis added)(37) The first Labour
 
Attache in London was Sam Berger, who, in the words of
 
Denis Healey,
 
 
 
'By developing good personal relations with many key
 
figures in the British Labour movement at the end of
 
the war, including Sam Watson and Hugh Gaitskell,
 
exerted an enduring influence on British foreign
 
policy.'(38)
 
 
Philip Kaiser commented that Berger
 
 
 
'had extraordinary access to many members of the
 
[Attlee] cabinet, including the prime minister. It was
 
universally recognised that he was the key member of
 
our embassy.'(39)(emphasis added)
 
 
There were also 'Labour Information Officers' attached
 
to the Marshall Plan staff in the US Embassy in
 
London. One such, William Gausman,
 
 
 
'in May 1950 began discussions with a section of the
 
leadership of the Clerical and Allied Workers Union on
 
how to eliminate communists from the union.....
 
 
'cultivated the leadership of the Birmingham Labour
 
Party, whose journal, The Town Crier, closely
 
supported Atlanticism and American foreign policy
 
objectives in general.....
 
 
'convened a group in South Wales....to launch a
 
Labour-oriented newspaper, The Democrat....
 
 
'worked unofficially on Socialist Commentary"'
 
.....and became a founder member of its offshoot, the
 
Socialist Union, 'which served as a think tank for the
 
emerging Gaitskellite wing of the Labour Party.....
 
 
'liaised, advised, wrote, lectured, published - and
 
helped IRD [the Information Research Department] with
 
the distribution of one of their early publications,
 
The Curtain Falls.'(40)
 
 
The US post-war penetration of the British Labour
 
Party and wider trade union movement climaxes with Joe
 
Godson, who was Labour Attache in London from 1953-59.
 
Godson became very close to the Labour Party leader
 
Hugh Gaitskell - to the point where Gaitskell and
 
Godson were writing Labour Party policies and planning
 
campaigns against their enemy, Aneuran Bevan. For
 
example, after a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour
 
Party to discuss the expulsion of Bevan, Gaitskell
 
recorded how he 'drove to the Russell Hotel, where I
 
saw Sam Watson with Joe Godson, the Labour Attache at
 
the American Embassy.'(41)
 
 
The leader of the Labour Party is discussing Executive
 
Committee tactics with the US Labour Attache! This is
 
one of the dividing lines of this essay. You either
 
think is this unexceptional, uninteresting - even a
 
good thing - or you do not. I do not. I think it is
 
rather shocking; and I think that would have been the
 
reaction of most of the Executive Committee at the
 
time had they been made aware of it. In a footnote on
 
p. 384 of the Gaitskell Diaries, editor Philip
 
Williams writes,
 
 
 
'Godson, Sam Watson's close friend....thanks to his
 
trade union post was, like many labour attaches, seen
 
as representing his country's workers rather than its
 
government. But Gaitskell came in time to feel that he
 
was involving himself too deeply in Labour Party
 
affairs.'(42)
 
 
It may even be more complex than this for there is
 
evidence that the Labour Attache posts have been used
 
as cover by the CIA. Jonathan Kwitney of the Wall
 
Street Journal tracked down one Paul Sakwa, who told
 
him that he had been the case officer for Irving
 
Brown, the most important CIA agent in the labour
 
movement in Europe, handling Brown's budget of between
 
$150,000 and $300,000 a year, between 1952 and 1954.
 
From being Brown's case officer in Washington, Sakwa
 
went on to a post under cover as the Assistant Labour
 
Attache at the US embassy in Brussels.(43)
 
 
It was about the CIA - but not just them. The CIA was
 
only one of many agencies working in Britain in the
 
post-war years. Labour Attaches reported, formally
 
anyway, to the State Department. In the end, would it
 
make any difference to know that Joe Godson had really
 
been a genuine employee of the State Department, and
 
not CIA under cover as we might have once suspected?
 
 
 
Notes
 
 
23. This thesis has been most convincingly articulated
 
by Peter Weiler.
 
24. International Labour and the Origins of the Cold
 
War, Clarendon, Oxford, 1992
 
25. See Shoup and Minter.
 
26. I guess 'interventionist' is less offensive to the
 
American academic ear than imperialist. 'The
 
determination to intervene in Europe between 1945 and
 
1948 was fragmented, uncoordinated.' Pisani pp. 40 and
 
41.
 
27. Ibid. p 4.
 
28. 'James Forrestal raised private money for the
 
Italian elections of 1947. His initiative 'signalled
 
an end to the notion that redemocratizing European
 
countries could be accomplished simply by regenerating
 
their economies'. Ibid. p. 67.
 
29. I put it as 'think' because the reality was never
 
that neat and tidy
 
30. Cited in Carew p. 84
 
31. Pisani p. 91
 
32. Ibid. p. 96. ECA 'does engage in some gray and
 
black propaganda' but 'the programmes represent a very
 
small percentage of the total effort and are
 
coordinated with the CIA' Ibid . p. 12
 
33. Carew p. 153
 
34. Ranelagh p. 135
 
35. 'From its creation in 1948 until 1952 when the
 
Marshall Plan was terminated, the OPC operated as the
 
plan's complement.' Pisani p. 70.
 
36. Ibid. p. 67
 
37. Kaiser p. 113 'The labor attache...had...an
 
unusual opportunity to enhance American influence
 
among individuals and institutions that historically
 
have no contact with U.S. diplomatic missions'. Ibid.
 
p. 119
 
38. Denis Healey p. 113. Berger has two innocuous
 
entries in the Gaitskell Diaries, and the footnote
 
from the editor, Philip Williams, on p. 120 that he
 
was 'first secretary at the U.S. Embassy'.
 
39. Kaiser p.120
 
40. Carew pp. 128 and 9
 
41. Godson obituary in The Times, 6 September 1986.
 
See Gaitskell Diary ed. Philip Williams, pp. 339-41.
 
Carew p. 129 notes that there was some conflict
 
between Gausmann and Joseph Godson, apparently
 
reflecting divisions within the US labour movement. He
 
discusses these differences on pp. 84-5.
 
42. Godson's son, Roy, who appears on the same trade
 
union/spook circuit in the 1970s, married Sam Watson's
 
daughter. Watson was one of the most important trade
 
union leaders in the post-war period, chairman of the
 
National Executive Committee's International Committee
 
and a 'liaison officer' between the Parliamentary
 
Labour Party and the major unions.
 
43. Kwitney pp. 334-5
 
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
 
Post-war: private sector propaganda begins to regroup
 
As the war ended domestic politics returned to normal.
 
The propaganda organisations of domestic capital
 
restarted, though without the frenzy which had marked
 
the post 1918 period. Their big issue was the threat
 
of nationalisation of companies. The so-called Mr Cube
 
Campaign of 1949/50, against the possibility of the
 
nationalisation of the sugar industry, spent an
 
 
been jointly organised by the sugar company, Tate and
 
Lyle, and Aims of Industry, an anti-socialist pressure
 
group formed in 1942 by a group of well known British
 
industrialists. The Aims original Council had
 
representatives from Fords, English Electric, Austin,
 
Rank, British Aircraft, Macdougall's and Firestone
 
Tyres.(45) There were also smaller campaigns by the
 
Cement Makers Federation, the Iron and Steel
 
Federation and by the insurance companies represented
 
by the British Insurance Association.(46) The Road
 
Haulage Association sponsored anti-nationalisation
 
campaigns by the British Housewives' League, led by
 
Dorothy Crisp.(47)
 
 
By 1949 Aims of Industry had 'twelve area offices
 
blanketing the industrial sections of Britain. For the
 
fiscal year 1949-50 expenditures were budgeted for an
 
 
pre-war tradition, discussed below, of newspapers
 
reprinting anti-left briefings from Conservative Party
 
groups or fronts, continued with Aims of Industry.
 
Aims estimated that they had gained 93,178
 
column-inches of editorial space in 1949, worth over
 
 
claims to have had 41 radio broadcasts on the Home or
 
Light programmes of the BBC; and just before the
 
election of 1950 in January, 362 magazines and
 
newspapers gave 11,269 column inches to Aims-inspired
 
stories. Aims magazine, The Voice of Industry, thanked
 
the British press for their 'impartial partnership',
 
in March 1950, noting that 'News about the
 
achievements of private enterprise and the failures of
 
nationalisation and state control has been of
 
sufficient value to editors for them to have given it
 
space in their columns free.'(50)
 
 
The Economic League survived the war. In 1951 it
 
claimed to have held 20,058 meetings and 57,505 group
 
talks in the previous year; distributed 18 million
 
leaflets, and obtained 31,064 column inches of press
 
publicity; it employed 50 full-time speakers, 27
 
part-time speakers and 37 leaflet distributors; had a
 
full-time staff of 135, owned 43 vehicles etc.(51)
 
These figures apparently describing massive campaigns
 
by Aims and the League have to be treated with
 
caution. They might well be exaggerated and it is not
 
clear how successful they were. For all this
 
anti-Labour propaganda, Labour's total vote went up in
 
the 1951 General Election.
 
 
 
The Information Research Department
 
In the labour movement the Trades Union Congress was
 
working with the newly-formed, Foreign Office-based,
 
political warfare executive, operating under cover as
 
the Information Research Department (IRD), in an
 
anti-communist drive. IRD was not an innovation.
 
British politics since World War 1 is studded with
 
clandestine propaganda operations involving the mass
 
media of the day. The claims of massive post-World War
 
2 media penetration by Aims of Industry and the
 
Economic League are reminiscent of the operations of
 
the post World War 1 propaganda network operated by
 
Sydney Walton, described in Keith Middlemas' wonderful
 
book about British political history.(52) In the great
 
Bolshevik panic following the First World War, funded
 
by the industrial sources like the Engineering
 
Employers' Federation, Sydney Walton
 
 
 
'took the main propaganda role from a variety of front
 
organisations, set up during the war, such as the
 
British Empire League, the British Workers' League,
 
the National Democratic and Labour Party, and the
 
National Unity Movement, all of whom had been in
 
receipt of industrial subscriptions'.
 
 
 
million in today's money? - Walton's 'information
 
service' was supplied with information by the Special
 
Branch and the intelligence services of the day.
 
Walton eventually claimed to be able to put
 
'authoritative signed articles' in over 1,200
 
newspapers.(53) Parallel to the Walton network,
 
another group of major employers formed National
 
Propaganda,(54) which evolved into the Economic
 
League.(55) McIvor tells us that the League by 1926
 
had formed an Information and Research Department,(56)
 
was organising in 'cells',(57) and was forming 1000
 
study groups a year.(58)
 
 
The state followed suit. In 1919 it formed the Supply
 
and Transport Committee and prepared to run two
 
separate propaganda organisations in an emergency,
 
headed by..... Admiral Blinker Hall of National
 
Propaganda and Sydney Walton.(59) After 1922, this
 
network had largely been abandoned, and Middlemas
 
 
in the first six months of the 1926 General Strike,
 
this was spent on publicity, advertising and speakers
 
- not on the bribing of journalists and his earlier
 
techniques.(60) Out of this milieu - and the changes
 
in tactics it went through - emerged the Economic
 
League.
 
 
The Conservative Party had also been busy between the
 
wars developing propaganda systems through which it
 
issued, sometimes under its own name, sometimes under
 
cover of fronts, pro-Conservative material to the
 
newspapers for them to 'top and tail' and present as
 
normal, internally-generated copy.(61)
 
 
These examples of how to manipulate the media had been
 
learned by others in the British state system and a
 
few years later Neville Chamberlain and other
 
supporters of the appeasement policy secretly bought
 
and ran the weekly newspaper Truth. This was largely
 
an operation run by the former MI5 officer and
 
eminence grise of the time, Sir Joseph Ball. Ball used
 
the official government information machine to push
 
the Chamberlain line, formed the National Publicity
 
Bureau to do the same and, in 1937, through a
 
frontman, Lord Luke of Pavenham, bought Truth, and
 
proceeded to use it to denigrate the opponents of
 
Chamberlain and appeasement.(62)
 
 
 
IRD's genesis
 
Former Labour Minister Christopher Mayhew still thinks
 
he was responsible for the creation of IRD.(63) In
 
fact its origins are a good deal earlier. In March
 
1946 Frank Roberts in the British Embassy in Moscow
 
began sending telegrams to London warning of Soviet
 
imperialism and aggression.(64) In April the Russia
 
Committee of the Foreign Office was formed. In its
 
second meeting on May 7 1946, the Committee decided to
 
set up a propaganda organisation.(65) It was then just
 
a question of getting the Labour Cabinet to approve
 
the proposal. On the way junior Foreign Office
 
Minister, Christopher Mayhew, proposed such a
 
propaganda offensive in October 1947, and the
 
combination of deteriorating political circumstances
 
and a proposal from within the Party itself swung the
 
day and the Cabinet approved the formation of this
 
outfit in January 1948. In the second volume of his
 
Diaries, Robert Bruce-Lockhart, who had been a part of
 
the war-time clandestine propaganda system, records on
 
4 February 1948 that he dined with Christopher Warner
 
who had just become the Assistant Under-Secretary at
 
the Foreign Office in charge of 'our Information
 
Services'. Warner offered a new version of the origins
 
of IRD, telling Lockhart that 'As a result of a paper
 
put up by the Imperial Defence College, F.O. [Foreign
 
Office] have decided to renew political warfare on a
 
limited scale.' (emphasis added)(66)
 
 
In Foreign Secretary Bevin's presentation to the
 
Cabinet he spoke of Britain as a 'third force', who
 
would 'give a lead in the spiritual, moral and
 
political sphere to all democratic elements in Western
 
Europe'. The line was to be neither Washington nor
 
Moscow, apparently.(67) How seriously Bevin intended
 
this we do not know. But however nicely it was being
 
dressed up, this was pretty clearly part of the
 
developing anti-communist struggle. Mayhew said so in
 
a memo to Bevin. In any case, why would propaganda in
 
favour of social democracy have to be hidden?(68)
 
 
IRD was in a kind of management limbo between MI6, who
 
supplied it with some of its information and tasks,
 
and the Foreign Office, whose budget concealed it. IRD
 
was, very clearly, simply the Political Warfare
 
Executive (PWE) reborn - another example of the
 
ability of intelligence agencies, once established, to
 
survive the vagaries of their nominal masters in the
 
political system.
 
 
IRD was a triple layer. On the surface was its formal
 
cover within the Foreign Office as an information and
 
research department. Beneath that was IRD's role as a
 
propaganda organisation, dispensing white (true) and
 
grey (half true) propaganda in briefings to
 
journalists and politicians. But beneath that was the
 
third layer, the 'black' or psychological warfare
 
(psywar) tier. This third tier is hinted at in the
 
Foreign and Commonwealth Office''s recently published
 
history of IRD's origins . On p. 7 it notes that in
 
September 1948 - i.e. almost immediately - 'part of
 
the costs of the unit [were] transferred to the secret
 
vote......the move would.....avoid the unwelcome
 
scrutiny of operations which might require covert or
 
semi-covert means of execution.'(69)
 
 
There is little evidence of Bevin's 'third force'
 
notions in IRD's work once the politicians' backs were
 
turned and they had moved on to another item on the
 
agenda. The minutes of a 1950 meeting between IRD
 
officials and their U.S. counterparts show no evidence
 
at all such concepts. Christopher Warner, one of the
 
'fathers' of IRD, talks exclusively of anti-communist
 
activities.(70)
 
 
IRD eventually had representatives in all British
 
Embassies abroad. In the recollection of a former MI6
 
officer of the period, IRD was involved in 'some of
 
the more dubious intelligence operations which
 
characterised the early years of the cold war.'(71)
 
Former Ambassador Hilary King was told by a former SIS
 
officer who had worked in Germany after the war trying
 
to estimate Soviet bloc tank strength, that IRD
 
circulated a paper on the subject over-estimating that
 
strength by a factor of 40.(72) When the SIS officer
 
complained about the inaccuracy of the estimate he was
 
told by an IRD official 'what does it matter old boy
 
as long as the Labour government [i.e. of Attlee] push
 
through rearmament.' At home, in its second level
 
role, IRD wrote papers and briefing notes, and planted
 
stories in the media. Mayhew remembers that 'at home,
 
our service was offered to and accepted by, large
 
numbers of selected MP's, journalists, trade union
 
leaders, and others, and was often used by BBC's
 
External Services. We also developed close links with
 
a syndication agency and various publishers.'(73) The
 
1950 minutes of the IRD-US talks include Ralph
 
Murray's comment that 'Trade Union organisations and
 
various groups are used to place articles under the
 
by-line of well known writers.'(74) Among individuals
 
who received IRD material were Percy Cudlipp of the
 
Co-operative Movement, Herbert Tracey, pub-licity
 
director of the TUC and the Labour Party, and Denis
 
Healey, then the Party's International Secretary.(75)
 
 
 
The Freedom and Democracy Trust
 
Part of this anti-communist programme was the creation
 
of 'an influential group, including several members of
 
the [TUC] General Council, which was determined to
 
root out the communists.'(76) Among the group were
 
George Chester (General Secretary of the National
 
Union of Boot and Shoe Operatives), George Gibson
 
(former TUC chair), Lincoln Evans (General Secretary
 
of the Iron and Steel Trades Confederation [ISTC])
 
Andrew Naesmith (General Secretary of the Amalgamated
 
Weavers' Association), Alf Roberts (General Secretary
 
of the National Association of Card, Blowing and Ring
 
Room Operatives, later on the Board of the Bank of
 
England), G. H. Bagnall (TUC General Council
 
representative; General Secretary in 1939 of National
 
Union of Dyers, Bleachers and Textile Workers), John
 
Brown (ISTC) and Tom O'Brien (Kine Employees).(77) In
 
April 1948 this group became the Freedom and Democracy
 
Trust, and began publishing a periodical called
 
Freedom First. with the help of IRD.(78)
 
 
Unfortunately for all concerned, mixing with the
 
founders of the Trust was an American businessman
 
called Sydney Stanley, and the whole enterprise was
 
'blown' when Stanley became the centrepiece of the
 
infamous Lansky Tribunal hearings into civil service
 
corruption during the winter of 1948. Not only did
 
Stanley have many pre-war contacts with the U.S
 
unions, he adopted the robust American attitude to
 
officialdom: bribe it when you have to. But he got
 
caught.
 
 
Notes
 
 
44. Finer p. 94
 
45. See H.H. Wilson for an account of the Mr Cube
 
campaign. Aims Council personnel is from Kisch p. 28.
 
46. See Crofts, chapter 14 for these examples.
 
47. See ibid. pp. 99-109, especially p. 106 where the
 
League's funding by the Road Haulage Association, then
 
distantly threatened with nationalisation, is
 
discussed. Best account is Hinton's. Dorothy Crisp is
 
the historical figure who most resembles Margaret
 
Thatcher.
 
48. H.H. Wilson p. 228
 
49. Crofts p. 216. For more details of alleged
 
activities, see also the pamphlet The FBI, (Federation
 
of British Industry) Labour Research Department, 1949.
 
50. H.H. Wilson pp. 229 and 238. Kisch p. 37 claims
 
that by the late 1950s Aims 'controlled no less than
 
twenty-six monthly, weekly and quarterly publications
 
[and] edited and produced forty-five house magazines
 
for the Tate and Lyle organisation, the Express Dairy
 
and other organisations as well as the house magazines
 
of most of the leading members of the 4,000 or so
 
companies who constituted its chief supporters'.
 
51. Labour Research, July 1952. As late as 1981 it had
 
130 full-time employees. See the Daily Telegraph, 26
 
January 1981.
 
52. Politics in Industrial Society, Andre Deutsch,
 
1979
 
53. Ibid. pp. 131/2.
 
54. Ibid.
 
55. See, for example, McIvor's essays.
 
56. Echoed - intentionally? - twenty years later by
 
the state's IRD.
 
57. McIvor 'A Crusade...' p. 641
 
58. Ibid p. 646
 
59. Middlemas pp. 153/4
 
60. Ibid p. 354
 
61. See 'The Party, Publicity and the Media' by
 
Richard Cockett in Seldon and Ball (eds.), especially
 
pp. 550-553.
 
62. Cockett pp. 9-12
 
63. Mayhew p.107 where he cites the memo he wrote in
 
late 1947 to Bevin. Philip M. Taylor in his 'The
 
Projection of Britain Abroad, 1945-51', writes that
 
'The IRD was formed at the Foreign Office as a direct
 
response to increasingly hostile Soviet propaganda in
 
the wake of the communist coup in Prague, the
 
escalating blockade of West Berlin and mounting
 
pressure on Finland.' Taylor in Michael Dockrill and
 
John W. Young (eds.) 1989
 
64. See, for example, Ray Merrick; and, more recently,
 
the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's own publication,
 
IRD: Origins and Establishment of the Foreign Office
 
Research Department 1946-48, (History Notes, August
 
1995)
 
65. Ibid. p. 458 This is before the Cominform
 
rejection of the Marshall Plan, for example, over a
 
year away in 1947; before even the March arrest of Dr
 
Allan Nunn May and the revelation of the
 
Canadian-based Soviet spy ring; and before Churchill's
 
American speech in which he first used the term 'Iron
 
Curtain'.
 
66. Kenneth Young (ed.) p. 648
 
67. Merrick p. 465
 
68. Best account of IRD's early years is in Lucas and
 
Morris.
 
69. See note 21 above.
 
70. Notes on a meeting between Christopher Warner and
 
Edward Barnett, in London, Saturday May 20, 1950, in
 
Foreign Relations of the United States, Government
 
Printing Office, Washington DC, 1977, pp. 1641-6
 
71. Verrier, Looking Glass, p. 52 . Someone might
 
usefully re-examine all the forgeries in the first
 
phase of the Cold War and what influence - if any -
 
they had on policy-making. Two examples are discussed
 
in Sulzberger pp. 345-7. In 1948, having discovered
 
that something called 'Protocol M', alleging secret
 
Comintern instructions to the West German communists
 
was a forgery, a month late he is offered another one
 
in Italy, 'Plan K', plans for an alleged communist
 
insurgency. He comments that there is 'a network of
 
forgers and falsifiers ...busily peddling allegedly
 
secret documents to embassies, intelli-gence officers,
 
ministries and correspondents'. (p. 346) 'Protocol M'
 
is reproduced in Appendix II of Heilbrunn.
 
72. Telephone conversation with author, June 27, 1987.
 
73. Mayhew p. 111. There are some details of this in
 
the FCO publication in footnote 64 above.
 
74. Foreign Relations op. cit.
 
75. Weiler p. 216
 
76. Ibid. p. 217 citing The Times, February 10, 1948.
 
77. Weiler op. cit. fn 184, p. 369
 
78. Ibid. fn 189 citing The Times, 2 December 1948.
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
 
Common Cause and IRIS
 
The failure of the Freedom and Democracy Trust seems
 
to have deterred the TUC members from creating another
 
body so directly linked to the TUC General
 
Council.(79) Instead, some individual members of the
 
General Council, who had been involved in the Freedom
 
and Democracy Trust fiasco, joined a private group
 
with the same anti-communist aims. This was Common
 
Cause, whose origins are to be found in the merging of
 
two quite distinct political strands.
 
 
 
The AEU's 'Club'
 
One strand was the clandestine anti-communist (and
 
anti-socialist) organisation in British trade unions,
 
of which the best example is to found within the
 
Amalgamated Engineering Union (AEU). Within the AEU,
 
 
 
'An anti-Communist organisation was established at
 
meetings of the fifty-two-member national committee,
 
their ruling body in 1943 and 1944, and was followed a
 
few years later by a loose national organisation,
 
working in secret and known as "the side" or the
 
"antis" which succeeded in removing a good many
 
communists from office.'(80)
 
 
This was the organisation which later came to be known
 
as 'the Club' or 'the Group', and 'defined its purpose
 
in terms of preventing a Communist takeover of the
 
union'.(81)
 
 
 
'In the mid 1950s ..... the Right-wing members of the
 
Executive Council began attending the factional
 
meeting. In this period also a National Committee
 
"Club" organiser was discreetly appointed from amongst
 
the regular delegates to tighten the organisation of
 
the Right-wing faction(82)....At all National
 
Committee meetings during the period from 1956 to 1970
 
the right-wing controlled all places on the Standing
 
Orders Committee, and J. Ramsden, organiser of the
 
National Committee "Club" for nine years, was also
 
Chairman of its Standing Orders Committee for seven of
 
them. With [President] Carron in the Chair at the
 
National Committee and the union Secretaryship also
 
held by a "Club" member for the whole of the period,
 
procedural control by the Right was overwhelming.'(83)
 
 
 
The late Ernie Roberts MP quotes from a report of a
 
1951 meeting of 'the Club' (infiltrated by a member of
 
the left in the union), and notes that the principal
 
figure was Cecil Hallett, then AEU General
 
Secretary.(84)
 
 
 
Common Cause
 
This clandestine trade union anti-socialism joined up
 
with an Anglo-American anti-communist group called
 
Common Cause. The American group was formed in January
 
1947 as Common Cause Incorporated, by Mrs Natalie
 
Wales Latham (nee Paine). Among the great and the good
 
on its letterhead National Council were Adolph Berle
 
Jnr, Max Eastman, Sumner Welles and Hodding Carter.
 
Another well-known member was Clare Booth Luce, wife
 
of the owner of Time, Henry Luce, and later US
 
Ambassador to Italy. In his biography of Mrs Luce,
 
Alden Hatch notes that as early as 1946, before its
 
official launch, Common Cause had established liaison
 
with the anti-Soviet group, Russian Solidarists,
 
better known as NTS, and that John Foster Dulles was
 
the organisation's 'unofficial adviser'.(85) Hatch
 
also notes that Mrs Wales Latham became Lady Malcolm
 
Douglas-Hamilton - the only link I am aware of between
 
the US and UK groups. For when the British Common
 
Cause was formally launched in 1952, its first joint
 
chairs were John Brown, ex General Secretary of the
 
Iron and Steel Trades Confederation and member of the
 
TUC General Council and the self-same Lord Malcolm
 
Douglas-Hamilton MP.(86)
 
 
The British Common Cause, however, had been in
 
existence for some years before its official launch,
 
originally very much as the vehicle of Dr. C. A.
 
Smith, one of the more interesting mavericks of the
 
British Left in the 20th century. Smith met Trotsky in
 
the 1933, was Chairman of the Independent Labour Party
 
from 39-41, quit and joined Common Wealth as its
 
Research Officer in 1941. When some of the Common
 
Wealth party left to join the Labour Party, Smith
 
became Chair of Common Wealth. As the nature of the
 
Stalinist takeover of Eastern Europe became clear in
 
1947, Smith tried to take Common Wealth with him in
 
his increasingly anti-Soviet stance. They baulked and
 
eventually Smith left the party and joined or formed -
 
which is not clear - Common Cause in Easter 1948.(87)
 
 
 
The British League for European Freedom
 
Whatever the British Common Cause amounted to in 1948,
 
four years before its official launch, it had joined
 
forces with the British League for European Freedom
 
(BLEF), the first organisation formed in this country
 
in direct response to the Soviet Union's takeover in
 
Eastern Europe. The BLEF had been initiated in 1944 by
 
a quartet of Tory MP's, including Victor Raikes, a
 
pre-war member of the Imperial Policy Group.(88)
 
Despite the dominance of Tory MPs, the BLEF attracted
 
a trio of Labour MPs: Ivor Thomas (who defected to the
 
Tories in 1950 after the publication of his book The
 
Socialist Tragedy); George Dallas, former TUC General
 
Council member and Labour MP, Chair of the Labour
 
Party's International Committee during the war; and
 
Richard Stokes MP. Stokes was a 'socialist' of the
 
most idiosyncratic kind, having been a member of the
 
anti-Semitic Right Club before the war.(89) Although
 
information on these groups in this period is very
 
thin, it is clear that Common Cause and the BLEF were
 
very close. In 1950, for example, Common Cause
 
published a pamphlet, Communism and Democracy, by
 
Smith, in which he said he was writing as a member of
 
the BLEF. The two groups shared an office in Elizabeth
 
Street in London donated by the wealthy Duke of
 
Westminster.(90)
 
 
The Duchess of Atholl, one of the founders of the
 
BLEF, notes in her autobiography that the decline in
 
the BLEF's 'political work' was attributable to the
 
arrival of Common Cause, and from then on the BLEF
 
'concentrated its efforts on bringing home to people
 
the unhappy plight of the many Displaced Persons still
 
in Germany.'(91) This is something of a euphemism for
 
the BLEF's role as support group for Eastern European
 
exile groups such as the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of
 
Nations (ABN) then being run by the Secret
 
Intelligence Service (SIS). The BLEF produced an
 
offshoot, the Scottish League for European Freedom,
 
headed by Victor Raikes' colleague in the Imperial
 
Policy Group, the Earl of Mansfield. In 1950 the
 
Scottish League organised a conference in Edinburgh
 
for Eastern European exiles, many of them Nazi war
 
criminals and collaborators, who had been recruited by
 
SIS. They had been moved to the UK during the scramble
 
at the end of World War 2 by the British and American
 
governments for good, reliable, anti-Soviet 'assets'.
 
(92)
 
 
 
Common Cause USA
 
In the USA the fledgling CIA had sponsored a front
 
organisation, the National Committee for a Free Europe
 
(NCFE). NCFE's 'sister organisation' was Common Cause
 
Inc., which included among its personnel 'many of the
 
men - Adolf Berle, Arthur Bliss Lane, and Eugene
 
Lyons, among others - who simultaneously led
 
CIA-financed groups such as the NCFE and, later, the
 
American Committee for Liberation from
 
Bolshevism.'(93) Christopher Simpson notes that it was
 
Common Cause Inc. which, in 1948, sponsored the NTS
 
founder on a tour of the United States. (94) Just as
 
the British League for European Freedom became the
 
sponsor for the British exile groups in the
 
Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN), Christopher
 
Emmet, Chairman of the American Common Cause Inc,
 
turns up later as head of the American Friends of the
 
Captive Nations, the domestic support group for the
 
CIA-sponsored Assembly of Captive Nations (ACEN).(95)
 
 
The BLEF's George Dallas was one of those who stayed
 
close to American interests. He became preoccupied
 
with the danger of a communist take-over in China, and
 
formed the Friends of Free China Association, with
 
himself as chair and the Duchess of Atholl as
 
president. Dallas eventually attended the 1958
 
foundation meeting of what became the the World
 
Anti-Communist League. The one time socialist farm
 
labourer had come a long way. With him at that meeting
 
were Marvin Liebman, one of the key members of the US
 
'China Lobby', the late Yaroslav Stetsko, Ukranian
 
collaborator with the Germans and head of the ABN, and
 
Charles Edison of the John Birch Society.(96)
 
 
 
Common Cause UK
 
The official, 1952-launched Common Cause was
 
apparently founded by Neil Elles, Peter Crane (on both
 
of whom, more below) and C.A. Smith. Lord Malcolm
 
Douglas-Hamilton, then a Scottish Tory MP, and John
 
Brown were joint chairs. Brown had been the Treasurer
 
of the Freedom and Democracy Trust which had tried to
 
launch Freedom First five years before. It set up a
 
national structure with local branches - in 1954 there
 
were 14 - published a monthly Bulletin, and
 
distributed many of the standard anti-communist texts
 
of the time, for example Tufton Beamish's Must Night
 
Fall?; some, such as the 'Background Books' series,
 
published and/or subsidised by IRD; and leaflets from
 
the CIA labour front in Europe, the International
 
Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).(97)
 
 
In 1955 Common Cause's 'Advisory Council' included:
 
 
* Tom O'Brien and Florence Hancock, both past TUC
 
presidents;(98)
 
* Bob Edwards, General Secretary of the Chemical
 
Workers Union, 1947-51;(99)
 
* Cecil Hallett, Assistant General Secretary of the
 
AEU 1948-57; General Secretary 1957-64;
 
* Philip Fothergill, ex President of the Liberal
 
Party;
 
* Admiral Lord Cunningham;(100)
 
* a coterie of other retired senior military, the
 
Duchess of Atholl and Lord Ammon.
 
 
Such 'advisory bodies' may mean very little: this
 
might just be a notepaper job. Nonetheless, some of
 
the 'advisory body' were people with rather
 
specialised interests. For example, at one point the
 
name of General Leslie Hollis appeared on it. Hollis
 
had been the Secretary of the Chiefs of Staff
 
committee which 'considered, with Sir Stewart Menzies,
 
the head of MI6, and Warner [of IRD] and William
 
Hayter of the Foreign Office, what form of
 
organisation was required to establish a satisfactory
 
link between the Chiefs of Staff and Foreign Office on
 
matters connected with the day-to-day conduct of
 
anti-Communist propaganda overseas.'(101)
 
 
In the Autumn of 1955 the Common Cause Bulletin
 
reported that there had been moves at the Labour Party
 
conference that year to get it proscribed - but the
 
motion to that effect 'was among the many crowded out
 
from discussion'.(102)
 
 
 
The Labour Party's intelligence-gathering
 
Common Cause was one of the sources of information
 
used by the Labour Party in its anti-communist
 
activities in the 1950s. While no central unit was
 
ever formally established 'for collecting information
 
or monitoring the activities of communist-inspired or
 
pro-Soviet groups', in practice the National Agent's
 
Department at Labour headquarters, Transport House,
 
did the job, using as sources the publications of
 
proscribed organisations, regional organisers'
 
reports, 'Foreign Office' material - i.e. IRD - and
 
Common Cause.(103) The National Agent's Department
 
[NAD] had 'lay responsibility for compiling the
 
[proscription] list'. Shaw notes that in 1953 the
 
proscription list was expanded by the addition of
 
eighteen fresh groups.
 
 
 
'What happened was rather unusual. Without consulting
 
the NAD the International Department had submitted a
 
report to the Overseas Subcommittee on "peace" and
 
"friendship" societies. In response the Subcommittee
 
recommended that they all be proscribed. NAD officials
 
were never told the source of the International
 
Department's information though they assumed it to be
 
the Foreign Office [i.e. IRD] and Special
 
Branch.'(104)
 
 
A glimpse of the content of the NAD's
 
intelligence-gathering has been provided by the late
 
Ian Mikardo MP, who saw 'dossiers' in the possession
 
of National Agent Sarah Barker At a meeting of a
 
subcommittee of the NEC in 1955, Sara Barker objected
 
to Konni Zilliacus and Ernie Roberts as prospective
 
Parliamentary candidates. When Barker began quoting
 
derogatory comments from files she had in her
 
possession, Mikardo demanded to see the files.
 
 
 
'They were an eye-opener. No MI5, no Special Branch,
 
no George Smiley could have compiled more
 
comprehensive dossiers. Not just press-cuttings,
 
photographs and document references but also notes by
 
watchers and eavesdroppers, and all sorts of
 
tittle-tattle. I'm convinced that there was input into
 
them from government sources and from at least a
 
couple of Labour Attaches at the United States embassy
 
who were close to some of our trade union leaders,
 
notably Sam Watson.'(105)
 
 
 
Common Cause splits - IRIS is formed
 
The pretty unstable-looking mixture of admirals,
 
generals and trade union leaders that was Common
 
Cause, disintegrated in 1956. C.A.Smith resigned along
 
with Advisory Council members Fothergill, Edwards,
 
Ammon, Professor Arthur Newell and Sydney Walton.(106)
 
This group complained that the organisation had become
 
'reactionary' and that the promised democratic
 
structure had never materialised. In August 1956
 
Common Cause Ltd was registered, owned and controlled
 
by the 'reactionary' faction.
 
 
The original directors of Common Cause Ltd were:
 
 
* the new chair, Peter Crane, the director of a number
 
of British subsidiaries of American companies,
 
including Collins Radio of England, whose American
 
headquarters had connections with the CIA.(107)
 
* David Pelham James - Conservative MP, and Director
 
of the Catholic publishing house, Hollis and Carter.
 
There were a number of Catholics prominent in the
 
Common Cause network, including the man who ran IRIS
 
for any years, Andy McKeown. This is discussed below.
 
* Neil Elles, barrister and later a member of the
 
European-wide anti-subversion outfit, INTERDOC.(108)
 
* Christopher Blackett - a Scottish landowner and
 
farmer and, I presume, but cannot prove, a relative of
 
Frances Blackett, the original secretary of the
 
British League for European Freedom, discussed
 
above.(109)
 
 
 
IRIS
 
More or less in parallel with the formation of Common
 
Cause Ltd., an industrial wing, Industrial Research
 
and Information Services (IRIS) Ltd. was formed and
 
set up in the headquarters of the National Union of
 
Seamen, Maritime House. Initially, IRIS Ltd listed
 
three directors:
 
 
* Jack Tanner, the recently retired President of the
 
AEU;
 
* William McLaine, General Secretary of the AEU from
 
1938-47;
 
* and Charles Sonnex, the Secretary and Managing
 
Director, and the link with the parent body Common
 
Cause.(110) Also it had a manager, James L. Nash.(111)
 
According to Labour Research (January 1961), Nash left
 
to join the CIA labour front, the ICFTU.
 
 
In an interview with Richard Fletcher in 1979, C. A.
 
Smith, attributed the formation of IRIS to Common
 
Cause's discovery of just how careful they had to be
 
about interfering in union affairs.(112) Another
 
proximate cause for the formation of IRIS is suggested
 
by the comment from the Common Cause Bulletin of
 
January 1956 (pp. 4/5) that 'only a near-miracle can
 
prevent the Executive of the AEU from passing under
 
communist control during 1956.....already there are
 
clear signs of an all-out Communist effort to put Reg
 
Birch in this top trade union job'.
 
 
However, another interpretation of the Common Cause
 
split and the formation of IRIS is possible. In April
 
1955 SIS (MI6) were forced to acknowledge that their
 
networks of 'agents' inside the Soviet Union had all
 
been penetrated. Worse, the Soviets had been running a
 
deception operation with uncomfortable parallels with
 
the 'Trust' deception in the 1920s in which the Soviet
 
intelligence service created and ran a fake resistance
 
group to which the British government gave a lot of
 
money.(113) SIS had been using agents from Bandera's
 
OUN in Ukraine and from NTS.(114) Some time later that
 
year, SIS gave up all its emigre groups and in
 
February 1956 SIS handed over control of NTS to the
 
CIA.(115) What follows is what I surmise happened but
 
for which I have no evidence. Having taken control of
 
the British networks, new people were put in to run
 
things. The NTS support group in the United States was
 
Common Cause Inc. - with its British counterpart. In
 
London, the limited company Common Cause was formed
 
and all the trappings of members and branches were
 
dumped; a CIA officer or agent, under cover, the
 
cut-out to the Agency, was installed. (If this sounds
 
banal, it has to be remembered that in 1956 none of
 
this had ever been made public and there was no reason
 
for them to be anything but banal.) The American
 
assessment of the group's activities was that its most
 
important work had been, and should continue to be, in
 
the British trade union movement. The previous year's
 
attempt to have Common Cause put on the Labour Party's
 
proscription list was noted and a spin-off, trade
 
union subsidiary, was formed. Common Cause would fund
 
it - and act as another layer of insulation between it
 
and the Agency.
 
 
 
IRIS activities to 1963
 
IRIS published a newsletter and a variety of
 
pamphlets. They formed 'cells' - their word - to
 
combat communists in the trade unions. How many cells,
 
we do not know; nor in how many unions other than the
 
AEU. They intervened in union elections. A member of
 
ASSET, (which became ASTMS and is currently a part of
 
MSF) sued IRIS and won in 1958 after IRIS News called
 
him a communist. In the report of the TUC annual
 
conference in 1960, delegates describe IRIS personnel
 
intervening in the Association of Engineering and
 
Shipbuilding Draughtsmen (AESD) and the Association of
 
Supervisory Staff and Technicians (ASSET). The
 
delegate of the latter describes IRIS News publishing
 
the allegation that a candidate in a union election
 
was a communist. Labour Research alleged an IRIS role
 
in the National Union of Mineworkers and the Foundry
 
Workers (as well as AESD and ASSET).(116) Reporting
 
these events, Labour Research commented on IRIS News
 
that 'the main feature in the paper however is and
 
always has been news and advice about union elections.
 
In most cases the paper reports that certain
 
candidates are "receiving communist support" '. It
 
seems reasonably certain - though unproven - the IRIS
 
was receiving some of its information from IRD.
 
 
In putting out information - its monthly magazine and
 
pamphlets - and telling its readers who to vote for
 
and not vote for in union elections, IRIS behaved as
 
an exact mirror image of the groups on the left: start
 
a paper and put out a 'line'. The late Ernie Roberts
 
MP, for many years the only left-winger in the senior
 
ranks of the AEU - the union from whence came two of
 
the IRIS directors in 1956 - describes how the left in
 
the union and IRIS/and 'the Club' spent their time
 
infiltrating and reporting on each other's
 
meetings.(117)
 
 
In February 1966 the left-wing magazine Voice of the
 
Unions, part of the opposition to IRIS within the AEU,
 
asked where the IRIS money was coming from and
 
commented, 'At one time we are told IRIS employed an
 
office staff of six to ten.' Almost thirty years later
 
we learned that some of the money had come from the
 
British government after Lord Shawcross had contacted
 
Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and asked for funding
 
for IRIS.(118)
 
 
Shawcross had approached Macmillan at the right time,
 
for 'Supermac' had become infected with the fear of
 
the 'communist threat'. The Radcliffe Tribunal had
 
reported in 1962, devoting a whole section to the
 
Civil Service staff associations and trade unions,
 
expressing concern at the number of communists and
 
communist sympathisers holding positions in the
 
unions;(119) and his administration was being
 
afflicted by the espionage scandals of George Blake
 
and Vassell - and the Profumo Affair which Macmillan
 
apparently believed was part of a communist conspiracy
 
the bring him down.(120)
 
 
 
Catholic Action?
 
There is a distinct Catholic tinge to Common Cause and
 
IRIS. Hollis and Carter, the company which published
 
the Common Cause Bulletin, was a Catholic publishing
 
house. Catholics among the leading figures in Common
 
Cause included chairs David Pelham James(121) and
 
Peter Crane, Brigadier George Taylor, a director of
 
Common Cause circa 1958,(122) and Sir Tom O'Brien.
 
Catholics among the AEU/IRIS network include AEU
 
President Bill Carron and Jim Conway, IRIS's Cecil
 
Hallett, and the man who ran IRIS for nearly twenty
 
years, Andy McKeown.(123) So was there, as some on the
 
British Left believed,(124) a national Catholic Action
 
organisation operating in Britain, as it had in other
 
countries, such as Australia? Joan Keating
 
investigated this belief in the course of her doctoral
 
thesis, and though she found quite a thriving
 
Association of Catholic Trade unionists - the Catholic
 
Worker was selling 25,000 copies in 1956 - she found
 
no evidence at all of any national, co-ordinated
 
organisation.(125)
 
 
 
Notes
 
 
79. Though there is a hint that such activities may
 
have been continued abroad. In Coleman's book on the
 
Congress for Cultural Freedom (discussed below) there
 
is a reference to an Indian anti-communist politician,
 
Minoo Misani, who in the early post-war years, founded
 
the Democratic Research Service and published a
 
magazine called..... Freedom First. Coleman p. 150.
 
80. Wigham, p. 128
 
81. Minkin p. 180
 
82. Ibid.
 
83. Ibid.
 
84. Roberts pp. 124/5
 
85. Hatch, p. 187
 
86. The Times 25 February, 1952
 
87. Details on Smith from J.C. Banks, Editor of the
 
Common Wealth Journal. In the obituary of Smith in the
 
The Libertarian, the Common Wealth journal, no. 25,
 
Summer 1985, Smith is said to have formed Common
 
Cause. I believe this to be mistaken.
 
88. The Imperial Policy Group was largely the work of
 
Kenneth de Courcy. De Courcy edited and published the
 
Review of World Affairs during the Second World War.
 
The IPG and de Courcy in particular were much disliked
 
by the Soviet government of the time. Since then de
 
Courcy has published the newsletters Intelligence
 
Digest and Special Office Brief. De Courcy had some
 
influence on the right of the Tory Party into the
 
1960s. See index references in Highams on De Courcy.
 
89. This information from John Hope who has had access
 
to the Right Club's membership list. It is possible
 
Stokes had joined for reasons other than agreement
 
with the Club's aims.
 
90. Duchess of Atholl p. 252
 
91. Ibid.
 
92. Loftus p. 204
 
93. Simpson p. 222
 
94. Ibid p. 223
 
95. Ibid. p. 222. 'Christopher Emmet is a classic
 
example of those who ran the British Intelligence
 
fronts before and during World War II and who, having
 
proven themselves faithful and competent, went on to
 
run the CIA/MI6 fronts of the Cold War.' Mahl, thesis,
 
p. 198.
 
96. Details of the WACL meeting is in Charles
 
Goldman's 'World Anti-Communist League', adapted from
 
Under Dackke, ed. Frik Krensen and Petter Sommerfelt
 
(Demos, Copenhagen, 1978). I am unsure of the source
 
of this Goldman article but it appears to be an early
 
edition of Counterspy. Dallas' career, with some of
 
the later associations glossed over, is described by
 
his son in the Dictionary of Labour Biography eds.
 
Saville and Bellamy, vol. 4 1977.
 
97. On ICFTU and the CIA see the comments of former
 
CIA officers Joseph Smith (p. 138) and Philip Agee
 
(CIA Diary) (p. 611). For a more general discussion
 
see Winslow Peck. The rival but much less significant
 
World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) was, of
 
course, funded and run by the Soviet Union.
 
98. Hancock had been Chief Woman Officer of the TUC.
 
99. Edwards had been chair of the ILP. During 1948 the
 
Chemical Workers Union had been involved in protracted
 
proceedings over alleged forged ballot papers by
 
communists.
 
100. In 1945, as Chief of the Defence Staff he had
 
threatened Attlee with resignation over proposed
 
defence cuts.
 
101. Scott Lucas and Morris p. 101.
 
102. For which, perhaps, read 'our friends fixed the
 
agenda'.
 
103. Shaw p. 58
 
104. Ibid. pp. 58 and 9 Shaw notes in footnote 44 p.
 
314 that 'at least one NAD official was approached by
 
a member of the Special Branch [and brother of a
 
future International Secretary] offering
 
"assistance".'
 
105. Mikardo p. 131.
 
106. The Times, April 6, 1957
 
107. Collins Radio was first linked with CIA
 
operations by Peter Dale Scott in his unpublished
 
manuscript, The Dallas Conspiracy, ch. 11 p. 3. More
 
recently, 'Collins Radio' by Bill Kelly, in Back
 
Channels, (USA) Vol. 1, Number 4, lists a number of
 
links between the company and the CIA-controlled
 
anti-Castro milieu of the early 1960s
 
108. On INTERDOC see Crozier pp. 49 and 81.
 
109. Frances Blackett in Duchess of Atholl, p. 250.
 
110. The Times, 6 April 1957
 
111. IRIS News, vol. 1, no 1, 1956. According to
 
Anthony Carew, Nash was also a member of the AEU.
 
112. Fletcher's notes of the conversation say that
 
that 'wealthy people got at [Common Cause executive
 
member Charles] Sonnex (without telling CAS) asked him
 
to lead IRIS. S.[onnex] remained on CC exec. Rich
 
people attached more importance to IRIS.'
 
113. See Tom Bower's Red Web on the SIS post-war
 
operations and chapter 8, in particular, on the
 
dawning realisation that they had been taken for a
 
ride - again. On 'the Trust' see Andrew, Secret
 
Service pp. 445-8
 
114. Ibid p. 165
 
115. Yakovlev p. 105. Soviet publications in this
 
field are not famously accurate, but this account has
 
since been confirmed by Tom Bower's biography of SIS
 
chief Dick White The Perfect English Spy, pp. 206 and
 
7. Yakovlev quotes from what purports to be an SIS
 
document, 'A Proposed Statement to the NTS
 
Leadership', which, presuming it to be genuine, may
 
have been given to the Soviets by Kim Philby or George
 
Blake. Bower quotes a brief section from the same
 
document.
 
116. Labour Research, January 1961, p. 10
 
117. See Roberts pp. 101, 122-4, 131 157, 203.
 
The left-wing Engineering Voice, Christmas 1966,
 
reported having received 'an anonymous and undated
 
document purporting to describe the proceedings of a
 
secret meeting recently convened by supporters of the
 
present leadership of the AEU.' The document referred
 
to a 'National Group meeting' and said attending it
 
had been fourteen full-time officers of the AEU.
 
118. Guardian, 2 January 1995, based on papers
 
released under the 30 year rule. See also 'Anti-red
 
and alive' in New Statesman, 10 February 1995.
 
119. Pincher, Inside Story p. 335
 
120. On Macmillan's paranoia about the 'communist
 
conspiracy' see Bower, Perfect English Spy pp. 308-9.
 
121. A director of Hollis and Carter
 
122. Keating, PhD thesis, p. 350
 
123. Ferris, p. 85. Engineering Voice, March 1969,
 
reported a two-day conference of the Association of
 
Catholic Trade Unionists, at which were H.E. Matthews,
 
a director of Cable and Wireless and some time
 
director of IRIS, and Andy McKeown of IRIS. Keating
 
quotes McKeown as suggesting that originally IRIS was
 
anti-Catholic because 'Freemasonry' had a 'strong
 
hold' on the organisation, and claiming that the man
 
who initially ran IRIS, Charles Sonnex, was a Mason!
 
124. One of those who believes there was a national
 
Catholic Action is former President of the Trades
 
Union Congress, Clive Jenkins. Conversation with the
 
author, 1995.
 
125. Keating thesis, p. 335.
 
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
Part 2
 
 
Atlantic Crossings
 
 
The Congress for Cultural Freedom, the Campaign for
 
Democratic Socialism and the CIA
 
As well as the programmes to inculcate American
 
notions of free market economics and union-management
 
relations - and good feelings about America - there
 
were operations aimed at the wider public and the
 
Labour Party. Large numbers of Labour MPs and trade
 
unionists were paid to visit the United States. Among
 
the Gaitskellite grouping in the Parliamentary party,
 
Gaitskell, George Brown, Anthony Crosland and Douglas
 
Jay all made visits.(1) Under the umbrella of just one
 
minor aspect of the Marshall Plan, the Anglo-American
 
Council on Productivity, 900 people from Britain -
 
management and unions - went on trips to the United
 
States to see the equivalent of 'Potemkin
 
villages'.(2) Hundreds of trade unions officers went
 
on paid visits to the US in the fifties under the
 
auspices of the European Productivity Agency and
 
groups of British union leaders were sent on three
 
month trade union programme run twice yearly by the
 
Harvard Business School.(3)
 
 
 
The Congress for Cultural Freedom
 
There was a European-wide - and world-wide - programme
 
to boost the social democratic wings of socialist
 
parties and movements.
 
 
 
'At Thomas Braden's suggestion and with the support of
 
Allen Dulles and Frank Wisner [then head of the Office
 
of Policy Coordination], the CIA began its covert
 
support of the non-Communist political left around the
 
world - trade unions, political parties and
 
international organisations of students and
 
journalists.'(4)
 
 
The biggest of these programs that we are aware of was
 
the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF from here on),
 
which began in 1950 with a large conference in the US
 
zone in Berlin, a demonstration of the strength of
 
anti-Soviet feeling among some of the West's
 
intellectuals and a response to the Soviet 'Peace
 
offensive' then underway.(5) At the time funds for
 
these gatherings were said to have come from the
 
American Federation of Labour, via Jay Lovestone - a
 
story offered up again recently by CCF apologist Peter
 
Coleman in his The Liberal Conspiracy. In fact they
 
came from the CIA, something alleged by the Soviet
 
bloc's media at the time but not believed.(6) The one
 
thing the Congress for Cultural Freedom's paymasters
 
were not interested in was cultural freedom. Peter
 
Coleman does his best. Of the first big 1950 jamboree
 
he writes,
 
 
 
'almost all the participants were liberals or social
 
democrats, critical of capitalism and opposed to
 
colonialism, imperialism, nationalism, racism and
 
dictatorship'.
 
 
If the British delegation is anything to go by, this
 
is not true. Of the four British delegates named by
 
Coleman, one was Christopher Hollis, a right-wing
 
Catholic and some time Tory MP, (7) and another was
 
Julian Amery, one of the Tory Party's leading
 
imperialists! In any case 'cultural freedom' was a
 
euphemism for 'American capitalism'.
 
 
 
Encounter
 
The CCF began publishing journals - in Britain,
 
Encounter, which first appeared in 1953. Encounter
 
became a major outlet for the 'revisionist' - i.e.
 
anti-socialist, anti-nationalist - thinking of the
 
younger intellectuals around Labour leader Hugh
 
Gaitskell, such as Peter Jay, Patrick Gordon-Walker,
 
Roy Jenkins and Anthony Crosland, all of whom were in
 
Harold Wilson's first cabinet in 1964. The 1955 CCF
 
conference in Milan, 'The Future of Freedom', was
 
attended by Crosland, Richard Crossman, Denis Healey,
 
Roy Jenkins and W. Arthur Lewis MP.(8) Anthony
 
Crosland was a member of the International Council of
 
the CCF: his role, said the CIA officer who was
 
running CCF, was 'encouraging sympathetic people' to
 
attend CCF conferences.(9) There is no evidence that
 
Crosland was witting of the CIA connection. (And none
 
that he was wasn't, either.) Peter Coleman(10) lists
 
Gaitskell, Jenkins, Crosland, Rita Hinden, Patrick
 
Gordon-Walker, John Strachey, Dennis Healey and
 
Roderick Macfarquhar as Labour writers published in
 
Encounter. In 1960 editor Melvin Lasky wrote to fellow
 
CCF officer, John Hunt, referring to 'an enormous
 
friendly feeling for Encounter' in the centre and
 
right wing of the Labour Party.(11)
 
 
The revisionist wing of the Labour Party also had
 
Forward, the less glamorous (and poorer) Labour
 
weekly, set up to combat the influence of Tribune.
 
Money for Forward came from Alan Sainsbury, Chairman
 
of the retailers Sainsbury (whose son was to fund the
 
Social Democratic Party in the early 1980s), Henry
 
Walston, the land-owner, and the restaurateur, Charles
 
Forte.(12) There was also the $3000 'expenses' paid
 
made to Hugh Gaitskell for a talk to the Jewish Labour
 
Committee in the USA.(13)
 
 
 
Socialist Commentary
 
As well as Encounter and Forward there was the monthly
 
Socialist Commentary as a vehicle for the
 
anti-socialists in the Labour Party. Socialist
 
Commentary began life as a journal of an obscure
 
revisionist group of German refugees but by the early
 
1950s it had been absorbed by the revisionist wing of
 
the Labour Party. In 1953 a 'Friends of Socialist
 
Commentary' group was set up with Gaitskell as
 
Treasurer.(14) 'Socialist Commentary and the Socialist
 
Union were plugged in direct to the USA's Marshall
 
Plan operation in Britain by virtue of the fact that
 
William Gausmann, Labour Information Officer in the
 
London mission, was a member of the journal's
 
editorial board.'(15)
 
 
The dominant figure in Socialist Commentary was its
 
editor for 20 years, Rita Hinden, who had been
 
co-founder of the Fabian Colonial Bureau in 1940. The
 
Bureau, and Hinden in particular, became an important
 
influence on the thinking of the Labour Party - and,
 
to some extent of the British state - on post-war
 
management of the empire.(16) Hinden was also a
 
participant in CCF functions, wrote for Encounter, and
 
was described by the CIA officer in charge of CCF,
 
Michael Josselson, as 'a good friend of ours', on
 
whose advice the CIA 'relied heavily ...for our
 
African operations.'(17) On her death Denis Healey,
 
who had written widely for Socialist Commentary's
 
American counterpart, New Leader, said that 'Only Sol
 
Levitas of the American New Leader had a comparable
 
capacity for exercising a wide political influence
 
with negligible material resources.' But as Richard
 
Fletcher commented, 'He [Healey] obviously hadn't paid
 
a visit to Companies House whose register shows that
 
in recent years Socialist Commentary has been drawing
 
 
apparently also unaware that Sol Levitas was also
 
taking the CIA shilling.)
 
 
Socialist Commentary has got to be CIA but there is
 
not a shred of direct evidence that I am aware of.
 
 
 
The social democratic network
 
By the mid 1950s there was a palpable social
 
democratic network operating in and around the Labour
 
Party in Britain and reaching out into the British and
 
American states, both overt and covert. The career of
 
Saul Rose in this period illustrates this. After
 
wartime service in Army Intelligence, Rose was a
 
lecturer at Aberdeen University, before becoming the
 
Labour Party's International Secretary for three
 
years. He then moved to the then recently established
 
St Antony's College at Oxford, one of two British
 
institutions which sponsored Congress of Cultural
 
Freedom seminars in the UK. The other was Ditchley
 
Manor, Oxford. Both were outposts of the Foreign
 
Office/MI6 network.(19) (Former MP Dick Taverne,
 
mentioned recently that as as young man he went to a
 
Young Fabian conference at the other major Foreign
 
Office country retreat, Wilton Park....(20))
 
 
The same elements are visible in the contributors to
 
the short-lived Fabian International Review, begun in
 
1953. In its three years its contributors included two
 
academics from St Antony's, Gausmann, the Labour
 
Information Officer at the US embassy in London,
 
Douglas Jay, William Rodgers, and Mary Benson of the
 
Africa Bureau.(21)
 
 
It is easy at this distance to be indignant about
 
Labour politicians hobnobbing with the CIA. But in
 
1955, say, when Saul Rose left his job as Labour's
 
International Secretary, the media simply did not
 
discuss the Anglo-American intelligence and security
 
services. There were Americans with money scattered
 
about the higher reaches of the Labour movement in
 
Britain; but Americans with money had been scattered
 
about Britain since the war years, they had been
 
Britain's allies only a few years before, they were
 
anti-Stalinist - and some of them, the labour officers
 
in one guise or another, were originally from the US
 
labour movement.(22) I think it likely that in the
 
1950s the Labour revisionists, the Hindens and
 
Croslands, believed they were taking part in a
 
'liberal conspiracy'(23) against the Soviet Union,
 
with progressive, democratic forces - people they
 
perceived to be like themselves. But from the CIA's
 
point of view, they were being run in one of the most
 
successful psy-war operations of the Cold War. This
 
operation had as one of its aims the struggle against
 
Stalinism; but the Americans sponsored and funded the
 
European social democrats not because they were social
 
democrats, but because social democracy was the best
 
ideological vehicle for the major aim of the
 
programme: to ensure that the governments of Europe
 
continued to allow American capital into their
 
economies with the minimum of restrictions. This aim
 
the revisionists in the Labour Party chose not to look
 
at. As the history of US imperialism since the war
 
shows, the US is basically uninterested in the
 
ideology of host governments, and has supported
 
everything from social democrats to the most feral,
 
military dictatorships in South and Central America.
 
But its other aims went largely unrecognised. (This,
 
perhaps, is a tribute to the skill of the US personnel
 
running the operations.) Looking at the networking of
 
the social democrats in the these post-war years, the
 
intimacy between US labour attache, Joe Godson, and
 
Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell, which once looked so
 
extraordinary, now looks less some awful aberration -
 
and triumph for Godson - than business as usual.
 
 
 
The end-of-ideology ideology
 
The strategically important thing for the United
 
States about the revisionist's version of socialism
 
was its central conclusion that ownership of economic
 
assets was no longer of paramount importance. (In the
 
USA, sociologist Daniel Bell was arguing the same
 
thesis, sponsored by the same people, under the rubric
 
of 'the end of ideology'.) This was obviously the key
 
line for US capital which wanted to penetrate the
 
world's markets and was meeting resistance from people
 
who called them imperialists. Officially the US was
 
also opposed to colonialism - especially British and
 
French; imperialism - especially British;
 
totalitarianism (except where dictators were the best
 
allies US business could find) and nationalism -
 
except Americanism, which was a universal creed of
 
such perspicacity and moral purity as to be beyond
 
objection. The one to take seriously among that
 
quartet is nationalism. In democratic Europe the CIA
 
chiefly funded those who were not nationalists. To US
 
capital, socialism was functionally simply a form of
 
exclusionary, anti-American, economic nationalism:
 
communism the most extreme of all.(24) The
 
internationalists in democratic Europe in the
 
immediate post-war years were, mostly, on the liberal
 
or centre left; the European right was, mostly,
 
nationalist. In France De Gaulle opposed US capital.
 
(And the CIA was to help finance the OAS against him.)
 
In Britain it was the nationalist Tories and some of
 
the socialist left who voted against the Marshall Plan
 
in the House of Commons. The US government only had
 
one operating criterion where a foreign government was
 
concerned: is it willing to allow US capital in or
 
not? It was called anti-communism, but it was also
 
anti-nationalism. Yes, it was precisely 'Taking the
 
teeth out of British socialism', as Richard Fletcher
 
put it in his seminal piece in 1977;(25) but it could
 
just as accurately have been called 'Taking the teeth
 
out of British economic nationalism'.
 
 
The US-supported drive by the revisionists in the
 
Labour Party had its first major set-back with the
 
rise of CND, climaxing with the famous narrow majority
 
in favour of unilateral nuclear disarmament at the
 
party conference in 1960. To the Gaitskellites in the
 
Labour Party it was little more than another communist
 
conspiracy. Gaitskell's leadership of the party had
 
largely been defined by the struggle with the left
 
(real and imaginary), and he believed the CPGB had
 
infiltrated the Labour Party, and was manipulating the
 
apparently Labour Left gathered round the newspaper
 
Tribune.(26) The Gaitskellites' response to the 1960
 
resolution had three dimensions: the formation of a
 
party faction, the Campaign for Democratic Socialism
 
(CDS); in the unions, the work of IRIS cells and other
 
anti-communist groups; and the use of the party
 
machine itself.
 
 
 
The Campaign for Democratic Socialism (CDS)
 
While the Gaitskellites dominated the PLP leadership,
 
and had the support of the major unions, they had
 
socialist opposition among the party's members.
 
Gaitskell needed a faction. What became the Campaign
 
for Democratic Socialism began before the pro-CND
 
Labour Party conference resolution in February 1960
 
when William Rodgers, Secretary of the Fabian Society,
 
a part of the social democratic network in the UK,
 
organised a letter of support for Gaitskell from
 
prospective parliamentary candidates. Among the
 
fifteen who raised their heads above the parapets in
 
this way were:
 
 
* Maurice Foley, who had been secretary of the British
 
section of the European Youth Campaign from
 
1951-59,(27) and later became a Foreign Office
 
Minister and trustee of the Ariel Foundation; (28)
 
* Ben Hooberman, a lawyer involved in the ETU
 
ballot-rigging case;
 
* Bryan Magee, who subsequently became a Labour MP and
 
then joined the SDP;
 
* Dick Taverne, who later stood against the Labour
 
Party as 'Democratic Labour' and joined the SDP;
 
* Shirley Williams, one of the 'Gang of Four', who
 
founded the SDP;
 
 
Shortly after, a steering committee, containing
 
Crosland, Jenkins and Gordon-Walker, was set up with
 
Rodgers as chair. The group began working on a
 
manifesto to be released in the event of Gaitskell's
 
defeat in the forthcoming defence debate at the Party
 
conference. On 24 November 1960, after the narrow
 
defeat for Gaitskell's line at the conference, this
 
group announced itself as the Campaign for Democratic
 
Socialism, with Rodgers as chair.(29) Immediately
 
after the formation of CDS, after his speech at
 
Scarborough Gaitskell 'consulted Sarah Barker [the
 
party's National Agent] who advised him that the
 
Campaign could have his distant blessing'.(30)
 
 
It set up permanent headquarters, officially 'financed
 
by contributions from individual members of the Labour
 
Party'. Ever since the Richard Fletcher article on CDS
 
et al in 1977 there have been questions about how this
 
operation was funded. In mid November 1960 - i.e. a
 
fortnight after the launch - Rodgers 'reported to the
 
steering committee that many small donations had been
 
received, together with a large sum from a source who
 
wished to remain anonymous.' As we saw above, Charles
 
Forte donated money to the founders of Forward, and in
 
his autobiography he quotes a letter from Gaitskell,
 
thanking him for his financial generosity. This is
 
undated unfortunately, but from the context it is 1961
 
or thereabouts.(31)
 
 
This donation, whatever it was, enabled CDS to have
 
'field workers in the constituencies and unions, whom
 
it supported with travelling expenses, literature and
 
organisational back-up, and other publications, plus a
 
regular bulletin campaign, circulated free of charge
 
to a large mailing list within the movement. And all
 
this was produced without a single subscription-paying
 
member.'(32) John Diamond was the CDS fund-raiser.(33)
 
 
 
A 1961 letter in CDS Campaign announced support from
 
45 MPs including Austen Albu (who wrote for IRIS),
 
Crosland, Diamond (who joined the SDP), Donnelly
 
(Desmond), who resigned in '68; Roy Jenkins (founder
 
and leader of the SDP), Roy Mason, Christopher Mayhew
 
(who joined the Liberals) and Reg Prentice (who joined
 
the Tories).(34) The following year were added new MPs
 
William Rodgers (another of the 'Gang of Four') and
 
Dick Taverne (who defected as a Democratic Labour MP,
 
later SDP) The Gaitskellites' historian, Stephen
 
Haseler noted, 'The whole Central Leadership of the
 
Party in Parliament, with the single exception of
 
Wilson, were Campaign sympathisers.'(35) In the
 
party's grassroots their significance is harder to
 
assess but a 1962 study found that CDS did have some
 
measurable effect in swinging perhaps as many as 1 in
 
3 of the Constituency Labour Parties in which they
 
were active.(36)
 
 
 
In the unions
 
Working in some of the unions were clandestine
 
anti-communist groupings, the best known of which was
 
the AEU's 'club', and IRIS discussed above.(37) One of
 
the people bridging the gap between the parliamentary
 
and trade union wings of the movement was Charles
 
Pannell, Secretary of the Parliamentary Trade Union
 
Group of MP's and an AEU-sponsored MP.(38) Pannell
 
told the American academic Irving Richter, of his
 
'close relationship' with the General Secretary of the
 
AEU, Cecil Hallett,(39) and of their combined efforts
 
to defeat the Left in the industrial and political
 
wings of the movement, by building IRIS 'cells'.
 
Pannell told Richter that he, Hallet, and the IRIS
 
cells working inside the AEU, were crucial in
 
overturning the AEU's 1960 vote for CND and so
 
restoring Labour Party's policy to being pro-nuclear,
 
pro-NATO.(40) Birmingham MP Denis Howells 'devoted
 
himself full time from the beginning of the Campaign
 
until his reelection to Parliament and then after that
 
part time to reversing the votes in the Trade
 
Unions....[and] played a very important part.'(41)
 
 
After the 1960 Party conference 20 members of the TUC
 
General Council signed a statement supporting NATO.
 
Four of them, James Crawford, Harry Douglass, John
 
Boyd and Sid Greene, were or were to become, officers
 
(on paper, at any rate) of IRIS: a fifth, Sir Tom
 
O'Brien, was still on the notepaper of Common Cause.
 
There were public gestures of support for CDS from
 
messrs Carron, Williamson and Webber, Ron Smith (Post
 
Office Workers), Dame Flora Hancock, Anne Goodwin, W.
 
Tallon and Jim Conway (both AEU), and Joe Godson's
 
friend, the NUM's Sam Watson.(42)
 
 
 
Using the party organisation
 
A committee 'consisting of the Party Leader, the Chief
 
Whip, Bill Rodgers, the secretary of the right-wing
 
ginger group the Campaign for Democratic Socialism,
 
and other influential figures' was formed and met
 
regularly 'to secure the selection of right-wing
 
candidates for winnable constituencies'.(43) Professor
 
George Jones, who had also been in CDS, commented that
 
'the relationship between CDS and the regional
 
organisers of the Labour Party was very
 
important.'(44) The CDS had the support of at least
 
half of the Regional Organisers, though how many is in
 
dispute. Seyd suggests seven out of the party's
 
twelve. Shaw thinks that Seyd must have got this wrong
 
because one of the seven was left-winger Ron Hayward,
 
who denies it.(45) CDS organiser Bill Rodgers said
 
that the regional organisers
 
 
 
'were fairly well disposed, including the youngest of
 
them who was called Ron Hayward, was very keen to have
 
CDS making a contribution in the areas in which he was
 
responsible..... We believed that the party could be
 
saved from itself and Hugh Gaitskell offered the best
 
prospect of saving it. Once we had established that
 
thought in the minds of the regional organisers, they
 
acquiesced in what we did.'(46)
 
 
 
Partnership of the two wings
 
There are glimpses of the two wings of the labour
 
movement working together. Cecil Hallett described a
 
meeting between IRIS and the Trade Union Group of MPs
 
in 1955 addressed by the CIA's labour man in Europe,
 
Irving Brown.(47) CDS member Bernard Donoughue
 
recalled how
 
 
 
'In the summer of 1964, the MP for Finsbury died and I
 
was telephoned by a friend, a left-wing journalist,
 
and told that I must watch out, that there had been a
 
meeting of key left-wing people and they had decided
 
to capture Finsbury. They had a candidate, they had
 
approached a number of people in the constituency,
 
they had 27 votes, the candidate was going to be Clive
 
Jenkins. I contacted one or two friends and the list
 
of CDS people in Finsbury, including the Post Office
 
and Telegraph Union people and they organised very
 
actively. It emerged that the left, despite its
 
incompetence,(sic) had their candidate and had 27
 
potential votes. CDS campaigned in the constituency
 
and we won by 31 to 27, that was the summer of
 
1964.'(48)
 
 
In the recollection of the candidate concerned, Clive
 
Jenkins, it was 1963. He was 'approached by a number
 
of trade unions and ward Labour parties to stand for
 
selection'. At the TUC at Blackpool he was tipped off
 
that the General Management Committee of the
 
Shoreditch and Finsbury constituency had been sent a
 
document which described him as, among other things,
 
the 'chief Trotskyist in Great Britain'. This had been
 
given to journalists by none other than Jim Matthews,
 
the national industrial officer of the Municipal and
 
General Workers Union, and an officer of Common Cause.
 
Jenkins sued, collected damages and costs and later
 
speculated about a CIA connection:
 
 
 
'I was told by reliable friends that the anonymous
 
letter, which had been mailed to every member of the
 
selection committee came from a man who was seemingly
 
a member of the CIA and operating under the cover of a
 
petty news agency.'(49)
 
 
It is interesting to see Donoughue referring to 'the
 
Post Office and Telegraph Union people'. I presume he
 
means the Union of Post Officer Workers, one of the
 
British unions with which the CIA is known to have
 
worked in the 1960s. In the 1950s Peter D. Newell was
 
an active member of the Socialist Party of Great
 
Britain. He worked as a draughtsman but wanted a
 
change of career. It was suggested to him that he join
 
the Post Office Initially not keen on what he saw it
 
was a downward move, he has recalled how 'quite subtly
 
(I now realise) it was suggested that once in the PO,
 
I would soon be able to write forThe Post , the
 
official fortnightly journal of the UPW [Union of Post
 
Office Workers] - and be paid for it!'(50) He duly
 
joined the Post Office, was contacted by Norman Stagg,
 
the editor of the journal almost immediately, and
 
began writing an anonymous, anti-communist column for
 
it under the by-line of 'Bellman'. For his column
 
Stagg provided source material from the ICFTU, IRIS
 
and the AFL-CIO. At the time the Union of Post Office
 
Workers was a member of the trade union international
 
body Postal, Telegraph and Telephone International.
 
(PTTI) Like many of the these international trade
 
union organisations, the PTTI was penetrated - some
 
would say run - by the CIA.(51) Its president was the
 
late Joe Beirne of the Communication Workers of
 
America. Beirne was also founder and
 
Secretary-Treasurer of American Institute for Free
 
Labor Development (AIFLD), created and run by the
 
CIA.(52) As far as it is possible to be sure of
 
anything in this field without a confession from the
 
man himself or his case officer, Joe Beirne was a
 
major asset of the CIA in the American and world
 
labour movements.(53)
 
 
 
Social democratic centralism
 
What Eric Shaw wittily calls social democratic
 
centralism, the attempt by the right to police the
 
entire Labour Party and trade union membership, peaked
 
in 1962. In March 1961 five MPs, including Michael
 
Foot, were expelled from the Parliamentary party for
 
voting against the Tory government's defence
 
estimates. The Gaitskellites repulsed the
 
unilateralists at the annual conference that year; and
 
in the Labour Party its 'personnel committee', the
 
organisational subcommittee, was dominated by Ray
 
Gunter MP(54) and George Brown, a 'CIA source', and
 
serviced by the Party's National Agent's Department,
 
which received its information from IRD and others.
 
Then things went wrong. Determined upon a final purge
 
of the Parliamentary party, George Brown approached
 
MI5, via the journalist Chapman Pincher, for evidence
 
of Soviet links to Labour MP's believed to be 'fellow
 
travellers'. But MI5 declined, apparently because
 
afraid that to do so would reveal their sources within
 
the PLP;(55) and then, with the Macmillan government
 
in what appeared to be terminal decline, Gaitskell
 
died suddenly and the right in the Parliamentary Party
 
- and the Anglo-American intelligence and security
 
services - saw the party leadership slip from the
 
Gaitskellites' hands as Harold Wilson won the
 
leadership election - and then the general election of
 
1964.
 
 
 
Notes
 
 
1. There is no detailed examination of this as far as
 
I know and I am not even sure how many such programmes
 
were run. Roy Hattersley recently commented that his
 
first visit to the US was paid for by 'something which
 
was laughingly called The Young Leaders' Program'. The
 
Guardian, 27 February 1995. In his memoir, A Bag of
 
Boiled Sweets (Faber and Faber, 1995) pp. 77-8, the
 
Conservative MP, Julian Critchley describes how, upon
 
letting the Tory Party Whips know that he had never
 
been to the United States, he was immediately fixed up
 
with a six week freebie courtesy of the US embassy in
 
London.
 
2. Carew p. 137
 
3. Ibid. pp.189/90. The British trade union whose
 
leadership responded most enthusiastically to these
 
American overtures was the General and Municipal
 
Workers' Union (GMWU) and it 'provided from among its
 
leading officials half the British participants in the
 
university trade union courses at Harvard and
 
Columbia...' Ibid. p. 191. GMWU General Secretary, Tom
 
Williamson, was one of the participants at the first
 
meeting of the Bilderberg Group in 1954. (Eringer p.
 
49) Other British participants included Hugh Gaitskell
 
and Dennis Healey, who discusses the Bilderberg
 
meetings in his memoir, The Time of My Life.
 
4. Smith, OSS p. 368.
 
5. Lasch p. 332 The 1951 CCF conference in Delhi was
 
explicitly a reply to a 'World Peace Conference'
 
sponsored by the Soviet Union.
 
6. Dittberner p. 112. Mr Coleman's objectivity on this
 
matter can be seen by his description of CIA officer,
 
Irving Brown, as 'European representative of the AFL',
 
the cover story even the Americans have abandoned.
 
Coleman p. 34.
 
7. Later a member of the editorial board of the
 
Catholic magazine,The Tablet This is the Hollis family
 
in Hollis and Carter, the Catholic publishers of the
 
Common Cause Bulletin.
 
8. Coleman p. 110 'Finally, Lasky moved Encounter
 
closer to the Hugh Gaitskell wing of the British
 
Labour Party.... Encounter became one of the principal
 
publications in which C.A.R. Crosland developed his
 
"revisionist" social democratic, Keynesian program'.
 
Coleman p. 185
 
9. Hirsch and Fletcher pp. 59 and 60. Labour Party
 
leader Hugh Gaitskell attended the conferences in in
 
1955, 57, 58 and 62.
 
10. p. 73
 
11. Coleman p. 185. Roy Jenkins, splendidly
 
insouciant,on Encounter: 'We had all known that it had
 
been heavily subsidised from American sources, and it
 
did not seem to me worse that these should turn out to
 
be a US Government agency than, as I had vaguely
 
understood, a Cincinnati gin distiller.' Jenkins,
 
Life, p. 118
 
12. Francis Williams p. 309
 
13. '...which helped him underwrite the costs of
 
Forward.' Carew pp. 129 and 30
 
14. Haseler, Gaitskellites p. 68
 
15. Carew p. 245
 
16. The Bureau 'enjoyed a direct and amiable
 
relationship with the Colonial Office, its advice was
 
always considered if not always followed.' Pugh p.
 
222. Another commentator's assessment was that
 
'Officials at the Colonial Office came to respect her
 
knowledge, judgement and persistence.' Labour MP and
 
fellow Bureau member, W. Arthur Lewis, quoted in the
 
entry on Hinden in the Dictionary of Labour Biography,
 
vol. 2, Macmillan 1974.
 
17. She visited India and Japan on a CCF-sponsored
 
trip after the Suez crisis. Fletcher in Agee, Dirty
 
Work p. 195
 
 
'the small capital grant (a modest bequest) on which
 
it had so far survived' in the account of Desai.
 
Commenting on the closure of Socialist Commentary in
 
1978, Desai writes (p. 174) that it 'had always
 
operated on a shoestring budget which had to be
 
supplemented by the dedication and persuasive power of
 
 
was a lot of money in the mid 1970s when Fletcher
 
found this out. The accounts of Socialist Commentary
 
were prepared by the accountancy practice of John
 
Diamond MP, one of the leading Gaitskellites, who
 
later joined the SDP and is now in the House of Lords.
 
He was also, for example, the Honorary Treasurer of
 
the Labour Committee for Europe. See Finer, Appendix
 
2. In this latter role John Campbell in his biography
 
of Roy Jenkins, p. 51, states that Diamond was
 
'charged with raising money that did not come from the
 
City of London.
 
19. Coleman p. 260 for the CCF connection. St
 
Antony's, Richard Deacon wrote in his The British
 
Connection, was 'an unofficial annex of MI6 in the
 
fifties.' p. 259
 
20. Dick Taverne, Institute for Historical Research
 
(IHR) Witness Statement on CDS, 1990, p. 8
 
21. Of the Africa Bureau, Anthony Verrier wrote:
 
'liberal, UK-based....on which [Colonial Secretary]
 
Macleod relied greatly for detailed background
 
intelligence on African independence movements. Unlike
 
some liberal organisations, the Africa Bureau was
 
never troubled by the attentions of the security
 
services or the Metropolitan Special Branch.' Verrier,
 
The Road to Zimbabwe, p. 335. From an old SIS hand
 
like AV, this is running up a flag and shouting
 
'spook'.
 
22. There had been contacts between the British TUC
 
and the U.S. labour movement ever since the late 19th.
 
century. See Marjorie Nicholson pp. 27 and 28. These
 
contacts were sufficiently intimate for Sir Walter
 
Citrine to work with senior figures from the US AFL in
 
one of the many front groups set up by British
 
intelligence to persuade US public opinion to support
 
the war in Europe. Mahl, thesis, p. 75.
 
23. The title of Coleman's study of CCF.
 
24. The best exposition of this thesis is in Fred. L.
 
Block.
 
25. Richard Fletcher, 'Who Were They Travelling with?'
 
in Hirsch and Fletcher.
 
26. For this latter belief, to my knowledge, the
 
Gaitskellites produced no evidence. Some of the Labour
 
Right proved incredibly gullible when it came to this
 
'communist conspiracy', accepting as genuine the most
 
obvious forgeries. See for example pp. 224-6 of Jack
 
and Bessie Braddock's memoir The Braddocks,
 
(Macdonald, London, 1963) for a particularly choice
 
example, passed to them by J. Bernard Hutton, who
 
fronted several such forgeries. Who produced the
 
forgeries? We do not know, but my guess would be IRD.
 
27. This was funded by the CIA, though Foley has
 
denied knowing this. See Bloch and Fitzgerald p. 106
 
28. On Ariel see ibid pp. 151-2 and Kisch pp. 67-8.
 
29. Haseler, Gaitskellites p. 211
 
30. David Marquand, IHR CDS Witness Statement, 1990,
 
p. 6. At the same seminar Bill Jones noted 'the
 
importance of Philip Williams...Philip had a fantastic
 
network of MPs'. IHR CDS Witness Statement, p. 13
 
31. Hirsch and Fletcher p. 62. See Forte p. 81 where
 
Gaitskell writes, 'things have gone remarkably well
 
inside the Party. And for this a very large amount of
 
credit must go to our friends in the Campaign for
 
Democratic Socialism, which you have helped so
 
generously.' (emphasis added.)
 
32. Hirsch and Fletcher p. 62
 
33. Windlesham p. 107
 
34. Haseler p. 217
 
35. Ibid p. 219
 
36. Driver p. 97 citing Political Quarterly.
 
37. There are odd traces of such groupings elsewhere:
 
In Labour's Northern Voice in May 1969 Chris Norwood
 
MP reported on the the 'Progressive Labour Group' in
 
the shop-workers' union, USDAW, originally formed to
 
fight communists but still operating and producing
 
lists of approved candidates, the core activity of
 
such a caucus.
 
38. Windlesham fn 3 p. 82
 
39. Hallett was on the Common Cause council in the
 
fifties.
 
40. Richter pp. 144 and 5
 
41. IHR CDS Witness Statement p. 14
 
42. Windlesham p. 109
 
43. Shaw Discipline p. 114
 
44. IHR CDS Witness Statement p. 24
 
45. Shaw fn 150, p. 331
 
46. Rodgers, IHR, CDS Witness Statement p. 25
 
47. Richter p. 151. George Brown, according to Tom
 
Bower's recent biography of Sir Dick White, was a 'CIA
 
source'. See p. 356
 
48. Bernard Donoughue, IHR CDS pp. 23/24
 
49. Jenkins pp. 49-51. I asked Jenkins about this in
 
1995 but he was unable to remember further details.
 
50. Letter to author, 25 May 1990.
 
51. See Agee, CIA Diary p. 618
 
52. Newell was introduced to Beirne at the UPW
 
conference at Blackpool. Newell wrote of this episode
 
in his life in
 
Freedom, September 25 1976, and more recently in
 
Perspectives number 9, 1995. On the late Joseph Beirne
 
and CIA see Counterspy, February 1974 pp. 42 and 43
 
and May 1979 p.13, and Agee CIA Dairy, p. 603.
 
53. On AIFLD see Fred Hirsch 'The Labour Movement:
 
Penetration Point for U.S. Intelligence and
 
Transnationals' in Hirsch and Fletcher, and 'The
 
AFL-CIA' by former US Air Force Intelligence officer
 
Winslow Peck in Frazier (ed.).
 
54. In 1968 he became a director of IRIS.
 
55. It also possible, of course, that they declined
 
because they had no such information, either because
 
none existed, or because they were too incompetent to
 
collect it.
 
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
 
The subversion hunters and the social democrats in the
 
1970s
 
The arrival of Harold Wilson as leader of the Labour
 
Party must have been a serious shock to the
 
Anglo-American intelligence services. One minute the
 
party was in the complete control of a faction which
 
they had been promoting - 'running' would be too
 
strong - since about 1950, and the next the party, and
 
the second most important part of the NATO alliance,
 
is in the hands of someone who has spent the post-war
 
years going to and from Moscow as an East-West trader!
 
 
 
The rise of the left in the Labour Party and trade
 
union movement, symbolised by the ascent of Wilson,
 
was being monitored by IRD and its satellites, the
 
Economic League, IRIS, Common Cause - and by Brian
 
Crozier, who raised the alarm in the 1970 collection
 
he edited, We Will Bury You..(73) Working the same
 
seam - presumably for different sponsors - was former
 
Army officer and Conservative MP, Geoffrey
 
Stewart-Smith. In Stewart-Smith's journal, East-West
 
Digest, in 1972, for example, we find the names who
 
appeared in Crozier's 1970 anthology: Harry Welton of
 
the Economic League, who had been in the anti-left
 
business for 'fifty fighting years', to cite the title
 
of the League's in-house history, and David Williams,
 
the main writer for the Common Cause Bulletin.(74)
 
 
 
The abolition of the proscription list
 
Anxiety among the subversive-watchers heightened
 
throughout the Heath years as the insurrection in
 
Northern Ireland continued and conflict with the
 
labour movement on the mainland UK increased, and
 
leapt enormously with the abolition of the
 
Proscription List of the Labour Party in 1973. Most of
 
the Parliamentary Labour Party at the time seems to
 
have barely noticed its abolition, so insignificant
 
did the event seem. Of the various members of the
 
Wilson governments who have published memoirs or
 
dairies covering this period, only Tony Benn thought
 
it an event worth recording.(75) But to the
 
subversion-watchers it showed the extent of the CPGB's
 
influence in the Labour Party. Chapman Pincher at the
 
Daily Express, for example, one of the outlets for the
 
anti-subversion lobby, wrote nearly twenty years later
 
that 'the left-wing extremists who had infiltrated the
 
National Executive of the Labour Party induced the
 
1973 Party conference to abolish the Proscribed list.'
 
(emphases added)(76) But to what end? Pincher tells us
 
it 'meant that even MPs could join the World Peace
 
Council, the British-Soviet Friendship Society and
 
other outfits run essentially for the benefit of
 
Moscow.'(77) But these never amounted to much in the
 
1950s, and meant less than nothing in 1973. It was
 
precisely because those groups meant so little that
 
the list was abolished as an anachronism.(78)
 
 
For the subversion hunters the Proscription List
 
disappearing was one more event in a bad year, for
 
1973 also saw the first assault on IRD by the rest of
 
the more detente-minded Foreign Office.(79) The next
 
year saw the Heath government's defeat at the hands of
 
the National Union of Mineworkers, in some part due to
 
a CPGB sympathiser named Arthur Scargill. By mid 1974
 
the anti-subversive chorus were all singing from the
 
same page and the theory of Soviet control through the
 
CPGB, through the trade unions, through the Labour
 
Party, was being broadcast by everything from the Tory
 
press to the activists with connections in the
 
intelligence services and the military.(80) This is
 
the background to the cries and alarums of 1974/5, the
 
talk of military coups and the formation of
 
semi-clandestine 'action groups' and militias by,
 
inter alia, former Deputy Chief of SIS, the late
 
George Kennedy Young, and the late David Stirling. The
 
trade unions were at the heart of the
 
subversive-hunters' theory, with the AEU the most
 
important of them. When David Stirling's grandiose
 
Better Britain-GB75 plans were 'blown' prematurely in
 
1974, he abandoned them and joined forces with
 
TRUEMID, another group of anti-socialist former AEU
 
officials. (TRUEMID is discussed below.)
 
 
 
The Social Democratic Alliance (SDA)
 
Within the Labour Party itself there was activity to
 
combat the rise of the left. On the party political
 
axis two latterday Gaitskellites, Stephen Haseler and
 
Douglas Eden, in 1975 formed the Social Democratic
 
Alliance (SDA) and began the struggle with the left in
 
local London politics. (81) Over the next three years
 
the SDA, and Haseler in particular, received much
 
favourable newspaper coverage for their accounts of
 
the subversives' takeover of the Labour Party and
 
trade unions, much of it fanciful in the extreme.(82)
 
For example on the publication of his book, The Death
 
of British Democracy, Haseler wrote in The Times (29
 
April 1976) that 'we may now be on the verge of an
 
economy which will remove itself from the Western
 
trading system by import controls, strict control of
 
capital movements and eventually non-convertability of
 
the currency. At home this will involve rationing, the
 
direction of capital and labour and the final end of
 
the free trade union movement'; and in 1980, among the
 
Labour MPs Haseler and the SDA proposed to put up
 
candidates against, were those well-known
 
revolutionaries Stan Orme, Clive Soley, Neil Kincock
 
and Geoff Rooker! (83) Among the SDA's early
 
supporters was Peter Stephenson, then the editor of
 
Socialist Commentary.
 
 
 
And the AEU
 
July 1974 saw the formation, with Common Cause
 
funding, of the Trade Union Education Centre for
 
Democratic Socialism (TUECDS), which described itself
 
as 'an independent trade union education body run by
 
politically-moderate trade unionists for
 
politically-moderate trade unionists'.(84) TUECDS was
 
launched in November 1974 with a lecture by the SDA's
 
Dr Stephen Haseler. The personnel involved in the
 
early stages of TUECDS's life were members of the AEU,
 
notably John Weakley, and the building workers' union
 
UCATT. Among those who had been attending the first
 
year's meetings were UCATT officials, AEU officials,
 
David Moller, a journalist from the Readers' Digest,
 
then still one of the most important psy-war outlets
 
for the CIA, the widow of Leslie Cannon, Lord Patrick
 
Gordon-Walker and Kate Losinska, then recently elected
 
president of the civil service union, the CPSA.(85)
 
 
More former AEU officials, Ron Nodes, Sid Davies and
 
Ron McLaughlin, were involved in the formation of
 
TRUEMID, (the Movement for True Industrial Democracy
 
or the True Movement for Industrial Democracy, it's
 
been called both), launched in 1975 with finance from
 
a variety of industrial and City enterprises.(86)
 
TRUEMID did was IRIS had done: it tried to influence
 
the election of union officials by putting out
 
information about the supposed left in the union.
 
TRUEMID's activities were chiefly focused on the AEU,
 
the civil service union the CPSA and the electricians
 
union, the EETPU. David Stirling, after the collapse
 
of his GB 75 and Better Britain plans, was recruited
 
onto the TRUEMID council.(87)
 
 
Also reappearing in this period was the some time US
 
Labour Attache to Britain, Joseph Godson who, though
 
formally retired, had returned to the UK in 1971 and
 
continued with his labour attache work - pushing out
 
US views and interests among the British trade union
 
movement, and selecting trade unionists for freebies
 
to the US. Godson was a founder member of the Labour
 
Committee for TransAtlantic Understanding (LCTU), the
 
labour section of the British Atlantic Committee, a
 
NATO support group.(88) In May 1976 LCTU began the
 
Labour and Trade Union Press Service (LTUPS). On the
 
LTUPS editorial committee was the ubiquitous Peter
 
Stephenson, editor of the Gaitskellite Socialist
 
Commentary, and one of the early members of the Social
 
Democratic Alliance. Treasurer of the LTUPS was
 
General Secretary of the EEPTU, Frank Chapple, and its
 
chair was Bill Jordan of the AEU.(89)
 
 
 
Europe
 
The social democratic wing of the Labour Party had two
 
key positions: British membership of NATO and
 
retention of British nuclear weapons, and membership
 
of the EEC. After the defeat of CND at the Labour
 
conference of 1961 it was European Economic Community
 
(EEC) membership which became their great cause. With
 
this achieved with the EEC referendum vote 'yes' in
 
1975, when it came to the ideological struggles within
 
the Labour Party in the mid and late 1970s, in David
 
Marquand's words, 'they lost the battle of ideas with
 
the Left by default ....they really didn't fight the
 
battle of ideas.'
 
 
Support for EEC membership within the Labour Party had
 
been formally organised first in 1959 by the Labour
 
Common Market Committee (founders Roy Jenkins, Jack
 
Diamond and Norman Hart), which became the Labour
 
Committee for Europe in the mid 1960s. European unity
 
had been one of the projects favoured by the USA,
 
looking for good anti-Soviet alliances in the early
 
post-war era, and the European Movement had been
 
funded by the Agency.(90) As well as receiving the
 
support of the US, in the 1960s Gaitskellites Roy
 
Jenkins, Shirley Williams and William Rodgers were
 
among the regular attenders of the annual Anglo-German
 
Konigswinter conferences.(91) This time the social
 
democrats were being supported by the British Foreign
 
Office, which had decided by then that their future
 
lay in the Common Market.
 
 
The CDS, the Gaitskellites, never accepted Wilson as
 
the legitimate leader of the Labour Party and plotted
 
constantly against him. The personnel of the
 
Gaitskellites, the Labour Committee on Europe and the
 
CDS were virtually identical.(92) In the 1960s it was
 
the CDS that Harold Wilson identified as the group
 
working against him.(93) When the group formally broke
 
up it continued as a dining club, the 1963 Club. In
 
the early 1970s Tony Benn identified them as 'the old
 
Campaign for Democratic Socialism-Europe group'.(94)
 
 
In 1970 the election of the Heath government meant
 
that another serious effort to get Britain in the EEC
 
would be made and the issue would divide the Labour
 
Party then in opposition. In early 1971 Tony Benn's
 
diary records him talking - with Roy Jenkins - of the
 
Common Market issue splitting the Labour Party.(95)
 
Ten months later, on October 19, after a pro- and
 
anti- clash in the Shadow Cabinet, Benn commented on
 
the emergence of 'a European Social Democrat wing in
 
the Parliamentary Party led by Bill Rodgers.'(96) This
 
group formally announced itself on 28 October 1971
 
when 69 pro-Market Labour MPs voted with the
 
Conservative government in favour of entry into the
 
EEC in principle. From then on the group operated as a
 
party within a party, with William Rodgers acting as
 
an unofficial whip.(97)
 
 
 
A new social democratic party?
 
The leadership of the Parliamentary Gaitskellite
 
faction had fallen to Roy Jenkins, and as early as
 
1970 some of that group has begun trying to get him to
 
lead the formation of a new party.(98) After the
 
Europe vote in 1971 Dick Taverne and Bill Rodgers went
 
to Jenkins and told him they should resign and form a
 
new party.(99) Jenkins declined. Taverne's selection
 
for the Lincoln seat had been organised by the
 
pro-CDS, pro-Europe, Labour Party regional organiser
 
for the area, Jim Cattermole.(100) In December 1972 MP
 
Taverne, at odds with his constituency party, and
 
about to be deselected, decided to fight them and
 
suggested again that Jenkins leave and form a new
 
party. Jenkins declined.(101) In 1973, after winning
 
the Lincoln by-election as a Democratic Labour
 
candidate, against the official Labour Party
 
candidate, Taverne formed the Campaign for Social
 
Democracy and sought Jenkins' support. Jenkins
 
declined.(102) That year, however, helped by Sir Fred
 
Hayday, former chair of the TUC, and Alf Allen, future
 
chair of the TUC, Jenkins did 'set up an institutional
 
framework' with moderate trade union leaders - a
 
regular dining group in the Charing Cross Hotel.(103)
 
 
In December 1974 the Manifesto Group was formed within
 
the PLP. Described by Barbara Castle as 'a group of
 
middle-of-the-road and right-wing Labour MPs [which]
 
had been meeting to discuss how to counter the growing
 
influence of the left-wing Tribune group of MPs',(104)
 
its chair was Dr Dickson Mabon, its Secretary was John
 
Horam, now (1995) a Tory Minister, and two of its most
 
active members were CDS enthusiasts David Marquand and
 
Brian Walden.(105)
 
 
In the third Wilson government, formed in 1974, the
 
Jenkins group in cabinet was down to 'a beleaguered
 
minority of four', to use Jenkins' words, Jenkins,
 
Harold Lever, Shirley Williams and the late Reg
 
Prentice.(106) In his memoir Jenkins describes
 
Prentice as 'a man of flat-footed courage who had
 
emerged in the previous two years [i.e. 1973 and 74]
 
out of the rather stolid centre of the Labour Party
 
into....my most unhesitating ally in the
 
Cabinet.'(107) Throughout 1974-5 Prentice was moving
 
right very quickly and his speeches began to reflect
 
this. In 1975 Prime Minister Wilson took exception to
 
one of them, and 'More out of enlightened
 
self-interest than generosity', as he put it, Jenkins
 
told Wilson that if Prentice was sacked from the
 
cabinet he would also go.(108) Shortly afterwards
 
Wilson called Jenkins' bluff and shifted Prentice to a
 
junior ministry post outside the Cabinet proper.
 
Jenkins resolved to resign, tried to take Shirley
 
Williams and Harold Lever with him in resignation -
 
only to find that while he was ready now, Harold Lever
 
was not.(109)
 
 
In Jenkins' memoir there are some wistful remarks on
 
'1975 as a great missed opportunity for Heath and
 
Whitelaw and a whole regiment of discarded
 
Conservative "wets" as much for Shirley Williams and
 
Steel and me.'(110) Jenkins was looking back on the
 
1975 Common Market referendum campaign during which he
 
found it more congenial working with pro-EEC Tories
 
and Liberals than he did with the left-wing of his own
 
party. It would not be hard to imagine that left-wing
 
Tories like Heath and Whitelaw found Jenkins more
 
congenial than some of the right-wing yahoos then
 
gathering on the Tory Party's fringe;(111)and there is
 
a large hint in Mrs Thatcher's second volume of
 
memoirs, that some kind of realignment was attempted
 
on the back of the referendum.(112)
 
 
In December 1976 Prentice was discussing how to bring
 
down the Callaghan government with, inter alia, Tory
 
MPs Julian Amery and Maurice Macmillan, and
 
Gaitskellite Labour MP's Walden and the late John
 
McIntosh.(113) Haseler, whose information on this
 
comes from Prentice's diaries, tells us that, 'For
 
some years past the arguments for a realignment had
 
been taken seriously by a section of the Conservative
 
Party who had been close to Macmillan.'(114) Prentice
 
may have thought he was discussing bringing down the
 
government with Parliamentary colleagues, but in this
 
context they had other, more interesting, connections.
 
Amery was a former SIS officer and a friend of the
 
former Deputy Chief of SIS, the late George Kennedy
 
Young, who was then machinating against the Labour
 
government with his Unison Committee for Action.(115)
 
Maurice Macmillan had been a director of one of the
 
IRD front companies and had also been involved in the
 
attempt in the mid 1974 to launch a government of
 
national unity to prevent the reelection of Harold
 
Wilson. Prentice proposed that Jenkins form a
 
coalition with Margaret Thatcher as leader but, on
 
Prentice's account, haunted by memories of 1931 and
 
the fate of Ramsay MacDonald, not surprisingly, once
 
again Jenkins declined.(116)
 
 
When Harold Wilson resigned in 1976, Jenkins stood for
 
leader of the Labour Party, lost, and went off to
 
Brussels as President of the EEC. Jenkins bailed out
 
at a good time, for the pro-Common Market wing of the
 
Labour Party was losing the fight against the left in
 
the Parliamentary Labour Party - while constantly
 
talking about quitting and forming a new party. In
 
1977 the Campaign for a Labour Victory, 'in many ways
 
a resurrection of the of the Campaign for Democratic
 
Socialism', was launched.(117) William Rodgers' PA was
 
one of the chief organisers and it set up its office
 
in the HQ of the EETPU.(118) Its full-time organiser
 
was Alec McGivan who became the first full-time worker
 
for the SDP, four years later.
 
 
Around Jenkins in exile gathered some of the
 
Gaitskellites. Mike Thomas, a Labour and then SDP MP:
 
'there in fact were a group of people working with Roy
 
Jenkins outside parliament, most of whom were known to
 
many of us, friends of ours, some who were less well
 
known, in the SDA or elsewhere'.(119) In November
 
1979, after Jenkins' had been given the Dimbleby
 
Lecture on BBC TV in which to more or less announce
 
his intention of forming a social democratic party,
 
businessman Clive Lindley and London Labour Councillor
 
Jim Daley, both of whom had been active in the
 
Campaign for Labour Victory,(120) set up the Radical
 
Centre for Democratic Studies, 'a press cutting and
 
information service on the political scene in Britain'
 
- and a support group for Jenkins.(121)
 
 
Finally a group met to discuss forming the new party.
 
From the SDA there was Stephen Haseler; from Roy
 
Jenkins' UK support group, Clive Lindley and Jim Daly;
 
David Marquand, Jenkins' his PA in Brussels, and Lord
 
Harris, who had been Jenkins' PR man in the
 
1960s.(122) The last stop on their way out of the
 
Labour Party for these social democrats was the
 
formation of the Council for Social Democracy in 1981.
 
 
 
Soon after the Social Democratic Party launch, issue
 
52 of the now defunct radical magazine The Leveller
 
had as its cover story: 'Exposed:the CIA and the
 
Social Democrats'. The author was Phil Kelly, one of
 
the journalists who had exposed Brian Crozier's
 
Forum/CIA links, who had been the recipient of the
 
leaked documents from inside the Institute for the
 
Study of Conflict, and had led the campaign to prevent
 
the Labour government expelling former CIA officer,
 
Philip Agee. For his temerity Kelly had been labelled
 
a 'KGB man' in briefings given by MI5, one of which
 
was foolishly committed to paper by Searchlight editor
 
Gerry Gable.(123) Kelly's article went over some of
 
the ground covered in this essay, but though the CIA
 
was visible in the connection to the Congress for
 
Cultural Freedom and Forum World Features, the piece
 
otherwise failed to justify its billing.
 
 
 
Notes
 
 
73. The charge that these groups were IRD 'satellites'
 
is difficult to substantiate. None of their personnel
 
has, to my knowledge, every admitted it. However, all
 
these groups have published material which, in my
 
view, could only have come from the state - and I
 
presume that IRD was the proximate conduit. Take, for
 
example, the Economic League's 'Notes and Comments'
 
series. In No. 895, 'The New Face of Communism', there
 
is material quoted from Yugoslav radio and TV and
 
Radio Moscow. The Economic League, presumably, did not
 
have its own monitoring service.
 
74. East-West Digest mostly consisted of large chunks
 
of blind (authorless), extremely detailed, apparently
 
pretty accurate material on the British Left: reports
 
on meetings and conferences; documents and journals
 
analysed.
 
75. Benn entry for 11 June 1973.
 
76. Pincher 1991 p. 113.
 
77. Ibid.
 
78. The important group on that list was the then
 
minute Revolutionary Socialist League which was to
 
spend the next decade penetrating the Labour Party as
 
the Militant Tendency.
 
79. Crozier calls this 'the IRD massacre', but points
 
out that IRD had grown to become the largest single
 
Foreign Office department. See Crozier pp. 104-8.
 
80. From the likes of KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky we
 
have learned that the KGB were unaware that they were
 
apparently on the verge of controlling the Labour
 
Party through the trade unions.
 
81. Patrick Wintour in the New Statesman, 25 July
 
1980: 'three of [Frank] Chapple's closest union
 
colleagues, including his research assistant, have
 
been active in the Social Democratic Alliance'.
 
 
Crozier notes in his memoir that he first met the
 
SDA's Douglas Eden at one of the early sessions of the
 
National Association for Freedom. 'The NAF was
 
supposed to be strictly non-party, and the presence of
 
a long-time Labour man, as Eden was, emphasised this
 
aspect of its work.' p. 147
 
82. See, for example, Daily Telegraph, 7 July 1977,
 
The Times, 29 April 1976, and Daily Mail, 9 August
 
1979.
 
83. See 'Moderates drive to challenge 11 Labour MPs',
 
Daily Telegraph,1 February 1980.
 
84. This is from the only TUECDS document I have seen,
 
a progress report dated May 12, 1975.
 
85. TUECDS is discussed by Paul Foot in Socialist
 
Worker, 1 November 1975.
 
86. Michael Ivens of Aims of Industry claims the
 
credit for introducing Stirling to Ron Nodes. See his
 
obituary notice on Stirling in the Independent, 17
 
November 1990. Some of the TRUEMID funding is given in
 
'The bosses' union' in Leveller 17, 1978, and the most
 
detailed account of the organisation is in Hoe ch. 24.
 
87. See 'The Company They Keep', Monica Brimacombe, in
 
the New Statesman, 9 May 1986. Paul Foot in the piece
 
cited in note 12 states that TRUEMID had six permanent
 
full-time staff and three temporary full-time staff.
 
88. see also State Research no. 16, pp. 68-74 and no.
 
17 pp. 95 and 96, and Sunday Times, 17 February 1980.
 
It was later funded by the US government's National
 
Endowment for Democracy.
 
89. Jordan was later to be among the founders of
 
another 'moderate' caucus in the trade unions in the
 
1980s, Mainstream.
 
90. The Movement's youth wing, the European Youth
 
Movement, had as its secretary Maurice Foley, one of
 
the Gaitskellites. See 'The CIA backs the Common
 
Market' by Weissman, Kelly and Hosenball in Agee ed.
 
Dirty Work.
 
pp. 201-3.
 
91. Bradley p. 52
 
92. With a number of important qualifications. Hugh
 
Gaitskell, for example, was not pro EEC membership.
 
93. Dorril and Ramsay p. 188
 
94. Ibid.
 
95. Entry for 13 January 1971, pp. 324-5 of Office
 
Without Power
 
96. Benn ibid. p. 381. Benn also added in that
 
paragraph: 'When I heard Charlie Pannell say that for
 
him Europe was an article of faith, he put it above
 
the Labour Party and above the Labour Movement, I was
 
finally convinced that this was a deep split.'.
 
Pannell was AEU, Common Cause, Catholic.
 
97. Bradley p. 53
 
98. 'Dick Taverne recalls a meeting of pro-Marketeers
 
in his flat to discuss tactics as early as June 1970.'
 
Ibid.
 
99. Ibid. pp. 53/4
 
100. Shaw, Discipline, p. 108. In the 'witness
 
seminar' on the CDS, p. 24, David Marquand referred to
 
'the great barony of Jim Cattermole'.
 
101. Ibid. p. 55
 
102. Jenkins in his memoir on 1973: 'Excluding the
 
possibility of forming an independent party, which at
 
that stage neither I nor my supporters were remotely
 
prepared for...' p. 360 (emphasis added).
 
103. Jenkins p. 354. In the CDS 'witness seminar", p.
 
27, William Rodgers stated that CDS had a 'very close
 
working relationship with Fred Hayday of the General
 
and Municipal Workers'.
 
104. Castle Diaries p.156
 
105. Bradley p. 60. With the exception of Giles Radice
 
and George Robertson, both GMWU/GMB-sponsored, the
 
whole of the active leadership of the Manifesto Group
 
subsequently defected to the SDP.
 
106. Jenkins p. 427
 
107. Ibid. p. 419
 
108. Jenkins tells us that he sent this message
 
through the Prime Minister's Principal Private
 
Secretary, Robert Armstrong, thus - deliberately or
 
not - informing the Whitehall establishment. Ibid. p.
 
420
 
109. Ibid. p. 422
 
110. Ibid. pp. 425-6
 
111. On 14 October 1975 Tony Benn records in his
 
diary: 'Robert Kilroy-Silk, Labour MP for Ormskirk,
 
 
pro-Market lobby and it was a fund of which the
 
trustees were Heath, Thorpe and Jenkins....the rumour
 
was that if Wilson moved too far to the Left they
 
would use the money to set up a new party.'
 
112. See The Path to Power, p. 331.
 
113. Haseler, Battle for Britain, pp. 59 and 60
 
114. Ibid.
 
115. The best account of Unison is in Dorril and
 
Ramsay.
 
116. Prentice thus managed to misunderstand - and
 
insult - both Jenkins and Mrs Thatcher.
 
117. Bradley p. 59
 
118. 'How Frank Chapple says on top', New Statesman,
 
25 July 1980
 
119. CDS Seminar p. 50
 
120. Owen p. 457
 
121. Bradley p. 73
 
122. Ibid. David Marquand on Haseler; 'Haseler's
 
invective is all working class... He's invented a
 
history of a sort of populist radicalism, Norman
 
Tebbitry in a way, ....I remember being involved in a
 
television thing in the early 1970s on Europe where he
 
opposed it on a sort of proletarian, solidarity,
 
populist-nationalist ground.' Desai pp. 10-11 fn. 11
 
123. This is the so-called Gable memo, first revealed
 
in the New Statesman, 15 February 1980 and reprinted
 
in full, for the first time, in Lobster 24.
 
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
The Crozier operations
 
Running through much of this activity in the 1970s was
 
Brian Crozier who had been warning about the rise of
 
the British Left since the late 1960s. Crozier takes
 
us back to the CIA operation the Congress for Cultural
 
Freedom (CCF) discussed in chapter five. The CIA
 
control of the CCF and the magazine Encounter began to
 
be threatened with exposure in 1963 when, reviewing an
 
anthology from the magazine, Conor Cruise O'Brien
 
wrote that 'Encounter's first loyalty is to America';
 
and an editorial in the Sunday Telegraph referred to a
 
secret and regular subvention to Encounter from 'the
 
Foreign Office'.(124) The next year, after a US
 
congressional inquiry into private foundations found
 
that some had received donations from the CIA, the New
 
York Times set journalists to work on the story. From
 
that point on exposure of the CIA fronts, which were
 
funded by some of these private foundations, was
 
inevitable.
 
 
 
Forum World Features
 
Faced with this impending exposure, the CCF/CIA began
 
to take action. The Congress's press agency was
 
detached, reorganised and renamed Forum World
 
Features, and Crozier was appointed its director in
 
1965.(125) Crozier claims that 'In 1968 the KGB made a
 
first attempt to wreck Forum';(126) and perhaps in
 
anticipation of the day when Forum was 'blown', with
 
other personnel from the IRD network Crozier set up
 
the Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC) between
 
1968 and 1970.(127)
 
 
 
ISC
 
The first funding came from Shell and BP but then, as
 
Crozier puts it, 'the Agency [CIA] now came up with
 
something bigger', and put him in contact with the
 
American multi-millionaire, anti-communist Richard
 
Mellon Scaife, who duly came up $100,000 p.a. for
 
ISC.(128)
 
 
ISC commissioned and published reports and began
 
briefing the UK military and police establishments on
 
the Crozier view of the Soviet threat to Britain.(129)
 
Crozier became a founder member of the National
 
Association for Freedom (NAFF), whose launch was timed
 
to coincide with publication of the dystopian
 
disinformation in The Collapse of Democracy by his
 
ally and colleague at ISC, Robert Moss. The
 
unfortunately acronymed NAFF was a gathering of the
 
anti-subversive and pro-capital propaganda groups such
 
as Aims of Industry, and, almost immediately became
 
the major focus of the British Right. It absorbed the
 
remnants of the 1974/5 civilian militias, and began
 
series of psy-war projects against the left and the
 
unions which prefigured much of what was to come in
 
the Thatcher government.(130)
 
 
 
Shield and the Pinay Circle
 
At the same, Crozier's voice was being heard in
 
Shield, a committee of former intelligence officers
 
and bankers, who, in the absence of IRD, prepared
 
briefings on the alleged communist threat for the then
 
leader of the Tory Party, Mrs Thatcher.(131)Crozier
 
was also a member of the transnational psy-war outfit,
 
the Pinay Circle, working alongside senior
 
intelligence, military and political figures from the
 
NATO countries,(132) was working with US Senate
 
Subcommittee on International Terrorism,(133) and
 
launched the apparently still-born US Institute for
 
the Study of Conflict.(134)
 
 
 
The Wilson plots
 
Because hard information on the covert operations of
 
this period came first from Colin Wallace, a member of
 
the British Army's psychological warfare unit in
 
Northern Ireland, in whose narrative the 'bad guys'
 
were MI5, and from Peter Wright, who had been an MI5
 
officer, those of us who began researching this period
 
in 1986 and after began by looking for MI5
 
operations.(135) In fact three British intelligence
 
agencies had an iron in the fire of the mid 1970s
 
crisis. There was a group of MI5 officers, led by
 
Peter Wright, who were plotting against the Wilson
 
government and, for example, trying to use the
 
Information Policy Unit in Northern Ireland to spread
 
disinformation about Wilson and other British
 
politicians whom MI5 regarded as 'unsound';(136) there
 
was also a group of ex SIS and former military
 
officers, led by former SIS number two, the late
 
George Kennedy Young, operating as the Unison
 
Committee for Action;(137) and there was the
 
Crozier-IRD subversion-watcher network.
 
 
The detente with the Soviet Union was the background.
 
In the UK it provided the context for IRD to be
 
reigned back. In the US, in the wake of Watergate and
 
the subsequent revelations of CIA activities in the US
 
and abroad, and the election of Jimmy Carter in 1976,
 
there was a purge in the CIA. To Crozier and others of
 
his ilk detente was a farce - a Soviet deception
 
operation - and these intelligence cuts a catastrophe.
 
(In their worst imaginings they were the result of
 
Soviet operations.)
 
 
 
Private sector intelligence agencies?
 
Into the breach stepped Crozier and a group which
 
included ex SIS officer Nicholas Elliot and US General
 
Vernon Walters. They created 'a Private Sector
 
Operational Intelligence agency' and named it 6I - the
 
Sixth International(138) - and found funding in the US
 
Heritage Foundation. Crozier began publishing
 
newsletters, Transnational Security, and British
 
Briefing, his own version of the IRD briefings on
 
British subversion which had been curtailed in 1974
 
upon the election of the Labour government. British
 
Briefing was financed by the Industrial Trust, edited
 
by Charles Elwell, 'soon after retiring from MI5', and
 
published by IRIS.(139)
 
 
What had begun a quarter of a century before as an
 
anti-communist caucus among the AUEW's senior
 
officers, had ended up fronting for Britain's leading
 
anti-socialist psychological warfare expert. I do not
 
know when British Briefing was first published, but
 
the issue which began to circulate on the left in the
 
early 1990s, number 12, was published in 1989, at
 
which time IRIS's directors included Sir John Boyd
 
CBE, General Secretary of the AEU 1975-82, Lord
 
(Harold) Collinson CBE, General Secretary of the
 
National Union of Agricultural and Allied Workers from
 
1953-69, and W. (Bill) Sirs, General Secretary of the
 
Iron and Steel Trades Confederation from 1975-85.(140)
 
 
 
 
The union leaders and the spooks
 
The IRIS-Crozier-British Briefing set-up sums up much
 
of what I have been trying to tease out. Three
 
anti-socialist, senior trade union leaders fronted the
 
clandestine production of an anti-socialist bulletin,
 
written and edited by former intelligence officers,
 
financed by British capital.(141) This anti-socialist
 
mechanism also involved the connivance of the Charity
 
Commission which allowed the Industrial Trust to
 
operate in a breach of the charity laws,(142) another,
 
non-charitable trust, the Kennington Industrial
 
Company, and personnel from large numbers of British
 
companies which funded it. (The money went to the
 
Industrial Trust which passed it on to Kennington,
 
which passed it on to IRIS; thus enabling the
 
Industrial Trust to cling on to its charitable - and
 
tax deductible - status.)
 
 
If this was still being funded in 1989, after 15 years
 
of Thatcherism and the fall of the Soviet Empire, how
 
big was this anti-socialist structure in, say, 1975?
 
Or 1965? Our knowledge of the whole operation while
 
greater now than ever, is still pretty limited,
 
despite the revelations about the Economic League in
 
the past ten years. For example, Aims of Industry is
 
thought of as simply a propaganda organisation. But it
 
is not so; at least it was not always so. In 1990 the
 
Aims Director, Michael Ivens, wrote:
 
 
 
Once, when Aims of Industry was rather more flexible
 
than it is now, we put a member of our staff into a
 
factory, at the request of the management, to prevent
 
a far-left take over.' (143)
 
 
Another part of this anti-socialist network is British
 
United Industrialists (BUI), one of the funnels
 
through which British companies pour money into the
 
Conservative Party and other groups on the right. In
 
1985 BUI's then director, Captain Briggs, told a
 
researcher I know who wishes to remain anonymous, who
 
was posing as a right-winger, that BUI were then
 
funding the Solidarity group of Labour MPs, the Union
 
of Democratic Mineworkers and the right-wing faction
 
in the Civil and Public Servants Association
 
(CPSA).(144)
 
 
The Labour Left has never really grasped just how
 
central, how commonplace a function of British
 
capitalism it has been to fund its opponents. This
 
knowledge has remained largely confined to Labour
 
Research and pockets within individual unions. (It is
 
hardly surprising that the Labour Party has never
 
shown much interest in this as it would have
 
embarrassed some of its biggest supporters in the
 
trade unions.)
 
 
By 1980 Crozier seems to have gone some way towards
 
replacing IRD's anti-subversive role by his own
 
efforts; and, with the election of Mrs Thatcher, he
 
and Robert Moss abandoned the National Association for
 
Freedom (by then renamed the Freedom Association) and
 
concentrated on the USA and the wider Soviet 'threat'.
 
 
 
It is impossible to evaluate the significance of
 
psychological warfare projects. Was the barrage of
 
anti-union propaganda put out by the
 
subversion-watchers in the period 1972-79 as
 
significant as the so-called Winter of Discontent in
 
its effect on public opinion in Britain? How effective
 
Crozier was, I don't know. He seems to think he had
 
quite a hand in the election of Mrs Thatcher in 1979.
 
In one of the planning papers written by Crozier for
 
his 'transnational security organisation', he wrote:
 
 
'Specific Aims within this framework are to affect a
 
change of government in
 
 
 
(a) the United Kingdom - accomplished......'(145)
 
 
 
Grandiose nonsense? Perhaps. Crozier has never been
 
taken as seriously in this country by the London
 
media-political establishment as he has has been
 
abroad, and his memoir was hammered by most of its
 
reviewers.(146) But this, for example, was the view of
 
a German intelligence officer, the source of the Der
 
Spiegel pieces, of Crozier in November 1979.
 
 
 
'The militant conservative London publicist, Brian
 
Crozier, Director of the famous Institute for the
 
Study of Conflict up to September 1979, has been
 
working with his diverse circle of friends in
 
international politics to build an anonymous action
 
group(147) "transnational security organisation", and
 
to widen its field of operations. Crozier has worked
 
with the CIA for years. One has to assume, therefore
 
that they are fully aware of his activities....'
 
 
 
Notes
 
 
124. Coleman p. 186. In this context 'the Foreign
 
Office' is a euphemism for MI6.
 
125. In his 1993 memoir Crozier acknowledges the CIA
 
connection. See pp. 63-5. But he had denied it as late
 
as 1990, in his review of Coleman's history of the
 
CCF. See 'A noble mess' in The Salisbury Review,
 
December 1990.
 
126. Crozier p. 75
 
127. With a Council including Max Beloff,
 
Major-General Clutterbuck, Sir Robert Thompson and
 
Hugh Seton-Watson.
 
128. Crozier p. 90.
 
129. See the documents leaked - or stolen - from ISC
 
published in Searchlight 18, 1976, and Crozier pp. 121
 
and 2
 
130. Crozier acknowledged the psy-war role in his
 
memoir. See page 118.
 
131. Shield employed as its researchers Peter Shipley,
 
who ended up in the Conservative Party Central Office
 
in time for the 1987 election, and Douglas Eden,
 
co-founder of the Social Democratic Alliance. But
 
Stephen Hastings has a slightly different version from
 
Crozier. See Hastings p. 236.
 
132. On Pinay see David Teacher's pieces in Lobsters
 
17 and 18. Crozier more or less gave a nod of approval
 
to these accounts by citing them, without criticism,
 
in his memoir. See note 3 facing p. 194. Among the
 
Pinay personnel were ex CIA director Colby, ex-SIS
 
officers Julian Amery and Nicholas Elliot, and Edwin
 
Feulner from the Heritage Foundation.
 
133. Crozier pp. 123-4
 
134. US ISC is missing from his memoirs. It was
 
formally launched in 1975, chaired by George Ball,
 
with a line-up which included Richard Pipes and Kermit
 
Roosevelt. See Document 3 in Searchlight 18.
 
135. Hence Lobster 11, 'Wilson, MI5 and the Rise of
 
Thatcher'.
 
136. This is discussed at length in Foot, Who Framed
 
...
 
137. It was Young and Unison, for example, who
 
initiated General Sir Walter Walker's Civil
 
Assistance.
 
138. Crozier pp. 134-6. Six 'I', says Crozier, because
 
there had already been 5 'internationals'. 'The fourth
 
International was the Trotskyist one, and when it
 
split, this meant that on paper, there were five
 
Internationals.' p. 136
 
139. On the Industrial Trust see Black Flag, 15 August
 
1988 which reproduced the Trust's accounts for 1986/7;
 
and on the IRIS connection to British Briefing, and
 
Elwell's role, see the Observer, 16 December 1990,
 
'Top companies funded smears through charity', and 23
 
December 1990
 
140. Although IRIS was still publishing its little
 
newsletter, IRIS News, in 1989, compared to British
 
Briefing it was so piffling as to be little more than
 
a cover story. Collinson and Boyd are dead and Sirs
 
did not respond to my questions
 
141. In 1986/7 twenty eight British companies gave
 
money to the Industrial Trust, including BP, Bass,
 
Unilever, ICI, Cadbury Schweppes and Grand
 
Metropolitan. Industrial Trust accounts filed with
 
Charity Commissioners were reproduced in Black Flag,
 
15 August 1988.
 
142. See 'Breach of charity rules justified' in the
 
Guardian,7 February 1991.
 
143. Sunday Telegraph (Appointments) 4 February 1990
 
144. I reported this first in footnote 93 on p. 43 of
 
Lobster 12 in 1986. I received no reaction to what I
 
thought was a rather explosive allegation. Kevin
 
McNamara MP, when I told him of this, replied that the
 
UDM hardly needed money as they had inherited the
 
considerable wealth of the old 'Spencer' union formed
 
in the 1920s.
 
145. Originally published in Der Spiegel no 37, 1982,
 
this was translated by David Teacher and reproduced in
 
Lobster 17, p. 14.
 
146. The best review was by Bernard Porter in
 
Intelligence and National Security, vol. 9, No. 4.
 
Most of Crozier's projects, says Porter, were
 
'pointless.'
 
147. 'Action group', is one of the key terms used in
 
this field. G.K. Young's Unison was the Unison
 
Committee for Action, a clear hint to the intelligence
 
insider as to its intentions.
 
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
 
Was there a 'communist threat'?
 
The term 'communist' was always flexibly applied by
 
the anti-socialist groups. The Common Cause and IRIS
 
reports, for example, went much wider to actually mean
 
the left, i.e. socialists; and sometimes simply anyone
 
who opposed those in positions of power.(148)
 
Nonetheless in a thesis about the political uses of
 
anti-communism we have to consider whether there was
 
anything to the 'communist threat', or if it was
 
simply a red herring dragged across the trail of
 
British politics.
 
 
On the British Left the question which heads this
 
chapter would provoke laughter, derision or anger from
 
many. For some, since 1956 the CPGB has been a
 
declining, bureaucratic relic, hardly a 'threat' to
 
anybody.(149) For others merely asking the question
 
gives credibility to disinformation from the right.
 
But the fact remains that significant sections of the
 
British Right, in the propaganda organisations of
 
capital, the state and the Conservative Party,
 
believed that the CPGB was part of a global
 
conspiracy, directed and financed by Moscow, which was
 
working in the union movement and wider society to
 
undermine capitalist democracy in Britain. And it is
 
no longer self-evident that this was complete
 
nonsense.
 
 
 
Orders from Moscow?
 
We now know that the CPGB actually was being directed,
 
to some extent, from Moscow after the war. Bob Darke
 
was a member of the Party's National Industrial Policy
 
Committee from the end of the war until 1951, when he
 
left the Party. He described that committee as 'a
 
Cominform puppet', receiving instructions, via
 
visiting French communists, from the Cominform.(150)
 
In the year Darke quit the Party, 1951, the CPGB
 
published a landmark policy statement, 'The British
 
Road to Socialism'. This announced a major shift in
 
policy in which the British CPGB ceased to base itself
 
on the Soviet model and would henceforth pursue a
 
peculiarly British, 'parliamentary road to
 
socialism'.(151) But in 1991 former CPGB assistant
 
general secretary, George Matthews, admitted that much
 
- though precisely how much is still not clear to me -
 
of the programme contained in the 'British Road to
 
Socialism' had been written by the Soviet Politburo
 
and approved by Stalin himself.(152)
 
 
 
Moscow gold?
 
There was 'Moscow gold' - bags of used notes, as well
 
as the subsidy by virtue of the Soviet Union's bulk
 
order of copies of the Daily Worker/Morning Star. The
 
'Moscow gold' claim was regarded as absurd, a state
 
smear, by most on the British Left, not least by CPGB
 
members, subjected to endless fund-raising appeals and
 
newspaper selling, and CPGB employees surviving on the
 
terrible wages the Party paid its staff.(153) But now
 
we know that the Soviet Union began sending money to
 
the British Party after the Hungarian revolt was put
 
down - apparently to compensate the British Party for
 
the loss of its membership (and hence membership fees)
 
incurred by the Party's refusal to condemn the Soviet
 
invasion. Senior CPGB person, Reuben Falber, would
 
meet the man from the Soviet Embassy and take delivery
 
of the bags of used notes. These would be stored in
 
the loft of Falber's house and then laundered through
 
the Party's accounts as 'anonymous donations' and the
 
like. It was as amateurish as that.
 
 
The Moscow money seems to have been used chiefly to
 
fund the Party's full-time staff. In the 1960s,
 
despite constantly falling membership, the party
 
employed a lot of people, 70 according to one source,
 
including the industrial network,(154) what 1980s CPGB
 
member Sarah Benton described as 'until the late
 
1970s, the privileged section of the party'. (The
 
Moscow subsidy ended in 1979.)(155)
 
 
 
Secret Party members?
 
There were also secret Party members, though how many
 
there were and what they did is unclear. The existence
 
of 'secret members', a staple on the right since the
 
war, appeared most strikingly in Spycatcher in which
 
Peter Wright recounts how MI5 had found the CPGB
 
membership files stashed in a rich member's flat and
 
photographed the whole lot - 55,000 files - in one
 
weekend, 'with a Polaroid camera'.(156) Wright claimed
 
that these files also 'contained the files of covert
 
members of the CPGB..... people who had gone
 
underground largely as a result of the new vetting
 
procedures brought in by the Attlee Government'.(157)
 
Wright's claims were denied by George Matthews, who
 
had been editor of the Daily Worker and assistant
 
general secretary of the Party.(158) However Bob Darke
 
described members, who for 'Personal Security', were
 
allowed not to reveal themselves as members when the
 
Party decreed that all members should 'come out' as
 
CPGB members in the other organisations to which they
 
belonged.(159) It may be that Wright simply remembered
 
it wrongly: it was not members who went underground
 
but who stayed underground. Further, Francis Beckett
 
reveals (though without a source) the existence of a
 
hitherto secret section of the Party, the Commercial
 
Branch, consisting of 'rich members, often Jews...
 
secret members... important industrialists' (emphasis
 
added), set up by Reuben Falber in the 1930s, which
 
apparently survived into the mid 1950s.(160) It
 
appears that it was partly the loss of the income from
 
this group after the revelations of anti-semitism in
 
the Soviet Union and the invasion of Hungary which
 
forced the Party to go to Moscow for money.(161)
 
 
But some money and instructions from Moscow, though a
 
striking confirmation in part of the right's theories,
 
do not in themselves tell us anything about the
 
influence of the CPGB.(162) (Conspiracies may be small
 
and ineffectual but nonetheless conspiracies.) And
 
measuring the influence of an activity with
 
clandestine aspects, which both the Party and its
 
opponents have had good reasons to exaggerate, will be
 
very imprecise at best.
 
 
Initially, post-war, the major focus of the state's
 
anti-communists seems to have been on the Soviet front
 
groups - the friendship societies etc. Eric Shaw
 
mentions that in 1953 the Labour Party's Proscription
 
List suddenly expanded with information about these
 
groups assumed to come from 'the Foreign Office [i.e.
 
IRD] and Special Branch' run through the International
 
Department of the Party.(163) This focus on the CPGB
 
front groups seems to be attributable to two things.
 
If Bower's recent biography of MI5 head Dick White is
 
accurate, one is the inadequacies of MI5 in the
 
post-war years.(164) The second is the the locus of
 
IRD within the Foreign Office network, where, engaged
 
in a propaganda struggle with the Soviet bloc
 
overseas, it was thus more interested in pro-Soviet
 
groups than in activities on the shop-floor.
 
 
The network of pro-Soviet groups is still the focus of
 
the big IRIS pamphlet in 1957, The Communist Solar
 
System; but the 1956 pamphlet by Woodrow Wyatt MP, The
 
Peril in Our Midst was subtitled 'the Communist threat
 
to Britain's trade unions', and since then it has been
 
the Party's industrial wing which has received almost
 
all of the attention - and about which there has been
 
quite wide agreement, across a broadish political
 
spectrum.(165) Wyatt in 1956 claimed that the CPGB
 
controlled the ETU and the Fire Brigades Union, nearly
 
had control of the AEU and had considerable influence
 
in the NUM. In 1962 the Radcliffe Committee, set up by
 
the Macmillan government in the wake of the Vassell
 
spy case, reported on the apparently extensive Party
 
control of the civil service unions; and that year the
 
Conservative MP Aidan Crawley claimed that the CPGB
 
was strongest in the NUM, building workers and the
 
AEU, and claimed they were making inroads into the
 
clerical unions, citing sections of the woodworkers',
 
the plumbers' and the painters' unions as being under
 
CP control.(166) Less ideologically interested,the
 
historian Keith Middlemas saw 'substantial CP
 
influence in the ETU, Foundry Workers, AEU and the
 
NUM, especially in Fife and South Wales';(167)and in
 
his recent history of the Party Francis Beckett
 
claimed that 'the Party practically had full control
 
of the Fire Brigades Union, the Amalgamated
 
Engineering Union, the Foundry Workers and the
 
Electrical Trades Union'.(168) Though not in
 
themselves proof of anything - proof would entail much
 
more detailed analysis of the various unions than I am
 
capable of - the lists are strikingly consistent over
 
the period from 1956 to 1994.
 
 
 
The struggle for the AEU
 
One of the recurring themes in the literature, from
 
the 1950s onwards, is the centrality of the struggle
 
in the AEU. IRIS was formed by AEU members and was
 
most active in that union (discussed above). This
 
concern quickens in the late 1960s and early 1970s as
 
the left, focused round the publications Voice of the
 
Unions and Engineering Voice, began to make
 
progress.(169) It is found, for example, in Brian
 
Crozier's 1970 anthology We Will Bury You, and in the
 
1972 IRIS pamphlet In Perspective: Concerning the role
 
of the Communist Party and its Effectiveness. In David
 
Stirling's GB75 documents, leaked and printed in Peace
 
News in August 1974, Stirling's opening paragraph,
 
'The Objective Summarised', is about the lack of a
 
contingency plan to 'weather the crucial first 3 or 4
 
days of a General Strike or one involving the
 
Amalgamated Engineering Union and the Electrical
 
Trades Union.'(170) Shortly after the leak, i.e. late
 
August 1974, Stirling met Ron McClaughlin and Frank
 
Nodes, both former AEU officials, who were forming
 
TRUEMID, the Movement for True Industrial Democracy. A
 
decade later the AEU was at the centre of former SIS
 
no. 2, G. K. Young's Subversion and the British
 
Riposte.(171)
 
 
While CPGB influence in the British unions - and thus
 
in the Labour Party - was a constant refrain on the
 
right, before the hysteria of 1974/5 there were only
 
two occasions in the post-war period when the CPGB was
 
even semi-seriously alleged to be posing a threat to
 
the whole economy. The first was the 1948 dock strike.
 
Charges of communist control were made at the time,
 
and by senior members of the Labour Government,(172)
 
but I have seen no evidence to support this claim and,
 
in its absence, think we can reasonably attribute the
 
claims to cynical manipulation of the 'red card'
 
during a period of intense domestic difficulty for the
 
Attlee government.
 
 
'Cynical manipulation of the red card' has often been
 
the description of the second occasion, during the
 
1966 seamen's strike, when Harold Wilson made his
 
notorious comments in the House of Commons about the
 
role of the CPGB in the strike, and actually named
 
CPGB members said to be active in it. This incident
 
deserves examination.
 
 
 
The 1966 seamen's strike
 
There are two issues here, only one of which, whether
 
Wilson should have said what he did, usually gets
 
discussed. Most people, including most of his
 
colleagues at the time, think it was a tactical
 
mistake, at best. Peter Shore told Tony Benn that he
 
thought Wilson's remarks were 'completely bonkers';
 
and Benn noted in his diary, 'I think I share this
 
view'.(173) The Labour Left were appalled by Wilson's
 
behaviour; some by his use of what they perceived as
 
the 'red card', and others by his use of clandestine
 
sources of information from MI5 and Special Branch.
 
For some, this was when they first perceived the
 
shifty, careerist Wilson, prepared to even play the
 
anti-communist card, to break the seamen's strike.
 
This view is powerfully expressed by Paul Foot in his
 
1967 essay 'The Seamen's Struggle'.(174)
 
 
In his essay Foot says that the 'basic charge' in
 
Wilson's second statement to the Commons was 'that
 
certain members of the Communist Party had been
 
engaging in a desperate battle to extend the seamen's
 
strike against the will of the NUS members.'(175) In
 
fact what Wilson said was much more complicated - and
 
more reasonable - than this suggests.(176) He began by
 
describing the CP's 'efficient and disciplined
 
industrial apparatus', and continued that 'for some
 
years now the Communist Party has had as one of its
 
objectives the building up of a position of strength
 
not only in the Seamen's Union, but in other unions
 
concerned with docks and transport. It engages in this
 
struggle for power in the Seamen's Union because it
 
recognises..... that democracy is shallow-rooted in
 
the union, not only that grievances and exploitation
 
have festered for many years.' He called it a
 
'take-over bid'.
 
 
Wilson said the objectives of the CPGB in the strike
 
were: 'First, to influence the day-to-day policy of
 
the executive council; secondly, to extend the area of
 
stoppage' [this is the bit emphasised by Foot] and
 
thirdly, 'to use the strike not only to improve the
 
conditions of the seamen - in which I believe them to
 
be genuine - but also to secure what is at present the
 
main political and industrial objective of the
 
Communist Party - the destruction of the government's
 
prices and incomes policy.' Wilson went on to say that
 
he knew that the NUS executive committee was dominated
 
by Joe Kenny and Jim Slater and that, while he knew
 
neither of them were communists, he knew of their
 
meetings with CPGB members in the union and the CPGB's
 
industrial organiser, Bert Ramelson.(177)
 
 
But smashing Wilson's pay policy was the aim of the
 
CPGB - and just about everybody else on the British
 
Left and in some of the trade unions. The rest of what
 
he said amounts to little more than an account of the
 
routine activities of all left groups in the labour
 
movement. They try to expand their positions and
 
influence inside every forum. This is what they do. If
 
Bert Ramelson et al were not trying to do these
 
things, CPGB members would be entitled to ask for
 
their subscriptions back. This is what they were
 
employed to do. The young Tony Benn also thought
 
Wilson's statement less than overwhelming. On June 28,
 
after Wilson' s listing of the CPGB members allegedly
 
involved in the strike, Benn wrote in his diary that
 
while the speech made him 'sick' and reminded him of
 
'McCarthyism', he added: 'In a sense Harold said
 
nothing that was new, since every trade union leader
 
knew it.'
 
 
The seamen's strike was a great boost for the CPGB and
 
for Bert Ramelson who had only taken over as the
 
Party's chief industrial organiser from Peter Kerrigan
 
earlier that year. Under Ramelson the Party began
 
classical 'broad left' campaigns in many of the
 
unions, run by Party-controlled 'advisory committees'.
 
Willie Thompson, himself a member of the CPGB, derides
 
the idea that these committees had any power.
 
 
 
'The CP advisory committees...were credited by an
 
alarmist press with being an organisational framework
 
through which a tight stranglehold was maintained upon
 
the country's economic existence; a network through
 
which flowed intelligence and commands enabling the
 
Kremlin via King Street to direct its thrusts...For
 
better or worse the advisories were just that - advice
 
forums - and their coordinating function even within
 
the individual area each one covered was weak.' (p.
 
136)
 
 
 
The evidence on this just is not clear: Beckett offers
 
a different account of these committees. However
 
Thompson more or less agrees with Beckett's claims
 
that destruction of the Wilson-Castle trade union
 
reform proposals, in the 'In Place of Strife'
 
document, was 'largely a communist triumph and Wilson
 
knew it';(178) and the latter cites the 1970 dock
 
strike, the postal strike of 1971 and the miners'
 
strikes of 1972 as disputes in which the Party played
 
a significant role.
 
 
In the 1970s, the anti-subversion lobby, orbiting
 
around IRD, and presumably informally briefed on the
 
reality of the 'Moscow gold' by MI5, took the picture
 
of real - and arguably, increasing - CPGB influence on
 
the trade unions, and added KGB/ Soviet control.To
 
this theory the Communist Party itself contributed by
 
occasionally boasting of its influence on the Labour
 
Party;(179) with the Labour Party itself unwittingly
 
adding the final touch by abolishing in 1973 the
 
Proscription List of organisations - mostly the 1950s
 
Soviet fronts - that Labour Party members could not
 
join, thus convincing the paranoids on the right that
 
the mice were in pantry. (180) Unaware of the 'Moscow
 
gold' evidence, the left dismissed the right's Soviet
 
angle as manifestly nonsense.
 
 
 
MI5's role
 
Unaware of the evidence: this is the key point. For
 
while the members of the CPGB - and the wider public -
 
knew nothing of the packets of used fivers arriving in
 
London, we know now that MI5 had been aware of the
 
Moscow gold run almost as soon as it was begun. We can
 
start with Peter Wright's memory again.
 
 
 
'Then there was the Falber affair. After the PARTY
 
PIECE operation, MI5 went on the hunt for CPGB files
 
which listed the secret payments made to the Party by
 
the Soviets. We suspected that perhaps they might be
 
held in the flat of Reuben Falber, who had recently
 
been made cashier of the Russian funds.'(181)
 
 
MI5 knew about the payments, and knew Falber was in
 
charge of them.(182) All they wanted were the presumed
 
accounts, the books - the evidence. Wright tells us
 
that MI5 planned to burgle Falber's flat but their
 
first plan failed - and leaves it there! To MI5 the
 
proof of the Moscow Gold must have had something of
 
the status of the Holy Grail; and we are to believe
 
that having located it they made only one attempt to
 
get it? Wright really wants us to believe that for 20
 
years, aware that the CPGB were getting actual Soviet
 
cash money, MI5 were either unable to detect the
 
payoffs in London, or, having made one failed attempt,
 
just gave up? This is simply not credible.
 
 
In the USA the FBI famously had so many agents inside
 
the CPUSA as to make the whole enterprise a farce; and
 
J. Edgar Hoover is quoted by a fairly senior ex FBI
 
source as having said, 'If it were not for me, there
 
would not even be a Communist Party of the United
 
States. Because I've financed the Communist Party, in
 
order to know what they are doing.'(183) As far as we
 
know, nothing quite like this happened in the UK. The
 
large transmitter found attached to the bottom of the
 
table in the CPGB's central meetings room, displayed
 
by ex CPGB Central Committee member George Mathews in
 
the Independent (25 November 1989), illustrates Peter
 
Wright's claim that 'By 1955....... the CPGB was
 
thoroughly penetrated at almost every level by
 
technical surveillance or informants'; and with the
 
spreading disillusion in the 1950s, climaxed by
 
Hungary, MI5 can have had no trouble recruiting active
 
and former party members, like the late Harry Newton,
 
to inform on the British comrades.
 
 
I do not want to argue that MI5 were running the CPGB.
 
 
 
But it did allow the CPGB to run.(184)
 
 
Had the existence of the 'Moscow gold' been revealed
 
in 1958 or 9, coming after the Soviet invasion of
 
Hungary, the CPGB would have been terminally damaged.
 
But for MI5 the 'communist threat' - and the link to
 
the Soviet Union - was simply too useful a stick with
 
which to beat the much more important wider labour
 
movement and Labour Party to be surrendered. The
 
Soviet connection with the CPGB enabled the Security
 
Service to portray both unions and the left of the
 
Labour Party, some of whom worked with the CPGB, as
 
subversives; and with a subversive minority in its
 
midst, this enabled the Labour Party as a whole to be
 
portrayed as a threat to the well-being of the
 
nation,(185) and thus a legitimate target for MI5.
 
Reviewing Willie Thompson's history of the Party,
 
social democrat John Torode (whose father had been a
 
significant pre-war member of the Party) charged that:
 
 
 
 
'The [CPGB's] constant encouragement of strikes in
 
support of unrealistic wage demands, the destruction
 
of Barbara Castle's union reforms and the coordinated
 
attempts to capture positions of power in order to
 
influence Labour Party policy, did much to destroy the
 
credibility of that party.'(186)
 
 
In one sense Torode is merely saying that the CPGB
 
tried to use such influence as it had in the trade
 
unions to frustrate social democratic policies and
 
build up its own position. Is this not what Communist
 
Parties always did? But in another way Torode has
 
missed the point. For the link with the CPGB
 
discredited the Labour Party because of the CPGB's
 
perceived connection to Moscow. If Torode's charge is
 
true - and I think it is to some extent - it was only
 
possible because MI5 had concealed the Moscow
 
financial connection and preserved the CPGB as a
 
significant force on the British Left.
 
 
Since so much of the British Left came either from, or
 
in opposition to, the CPGB, it is impossible to even
 
speculate convincingly how the the British Left - or
 
British Politics - would have developed if the Moscow
 
gold had been exposed in the late fifties. But it
 
certainly is possible that the anti-union hysteria of
 
the late 1970s, leading to the catastrophe of
 
Thatcherism - and the subsequent collapse of the
 
Labour Party - could have been avoided.
 
 
 
Notes
 
 
148. In 1964, for example, Common Cause issued a
 
pamphlet naming 180 people in Britain with 'Communist
 
connections', including Bertrand Russell, Lord Boyd
 
Orr and the painter Ruskin Spear! See the Sunday
 
Times, 31 May 1964. 'Big Jim' Matthews of the GMWU was
 
one of the Common Cause directors who approved the
 
publication
 
149. For this view see the memoir by Des Warren, The
 
Key to My Cell, New Park, London, 1982. One of the
 
so-called Shrewsbury pickets, imprisoned in 1972,
 
Warren had been a member of the CPGB, became
 
disillusioned and joined the Workers' Revolutionary
 
Party.
 
150. Darke pp. 59 and 60
 
151. A CPGB activist at the time, Harry McShane
 
describes in his memoir how 'overnight we all became
 
democratic and amazingly interested in Acts of
 
Parliament.....the idea was that, whereas the old
 
Industrial Department was concerned with industrial
 
action, the Labour Movement Department would influence
 
the Labour Party and the trade unions and change the
 
character of those bodies....'. McShane p. 246.
 
152. See Guardian, September 14 1991 and the
 
discussion in Labour History Review, Vol. 57, no. 3,
 
pp. 33-5.
 
153. My parents were both in the CPGB in the 1945-56
 
period and talked of the burden of trying to sell
 
Party literature. On the Party's low wages see, for
 
example, the letter from former Party employee Bill
 
Brooks in Guardian, 21 November 1991.
 
154. Independent, 15 November 1991
 
155. The people I knew of in the CPGB were, on the
 
whole, well intentioned left democrats who, almost to
 
a man and woman, became Euro-communists in the 70s and
 
80s. The impact on the Party of the revelation of
 
Soviet funding is discussed in detail in Mosbacher.
 
156. Think of the logistics of this: assuming only one
 
page per file, for 48 hours, using 1955 technology,
 
and without disturbing the other tenants in the block
 
of flats? It seems unlikely to me.
 
157. Wright, Spycatcher p. 55
 
158. Beckett p. 138 repeats the denials of Matthews,
 
attributing it to 'CP officials'.
 
159. Darke p. 86. On this 'coming out' of concealed CP
 
members, see the conference report in Labour History
 
Review, vol. 57, No. 3 Winter 1992, p. 29.
 
160. Beckett pp. 147-8
 
161. Evidence of secret CP members also comes from
 
another Communist Party. In her 1990 autobiography the
 
Australian feminist, poet and Communist Party
 
activist, Dorothy Hughes wrote of the period just
 
after World War 2, when the ACP was under pressure
 
from the state: 'Peter Thomas, Joan's former husband,
 
writes leaders for the West Australian and is an
 
undercover member of the State Committee of the
 
Party.' (emphasis added) Dorothy Hughes, Wild Card,
 
Virago, London, p. 122.
 
162. Other left-wing parties in Britain have received
 
foreign funding without amounting to anything. The
 
Workers' Revolutionary Party for example.
 
163. Shaw, Discipline, p. 59
 
164. See Bower, The Perfect English Spy, chapter 4
 
165. The Peril In Our Midst, Phoenix House, London,
 
1956.
 
166. The Hidden Face of British Communism, Aidan
 
Crawley, Sunday Times, October 28 1962, reprinted as a
 
pamphlet.
 
167. Middlemas, footnote on p. 414
 
168. Beckett p. 109. Like the rest of Beckett's book,
 
this is unsourced but presumably the estimate is from
 
CPGB members or former members.
 
169. See Roberts pp. 210-216. IRIS discussed 'Voice'
 
newspapers in their pamphlet The British 'Left',
 
August 1970, pp. 18 and 19. The scare quotes round
 
'Left' are IRIS's.
 
170. Peace News, special issue, 23 August, 1974.
 
171. Ossian, Glasgow, no date but circa 1984.
 
172. This is still believed on the right. See for
 
example in the obituary of the London CPGB dockers'
 
leader, Jack Dash, in the Daily Telegraph June 9,
 
1989. The various dock strikes and the alleged
 
'communist threat' are discussed in Jim Phillips.
 
173. Pimlott p. 407
 
174. In Blackburn and Cockburn (eds.). In that, and in
 
his book The Politics of Harold Wilson, Foot traces
 
the origins of the strike back to the smaller 1960
 
strike and the formation of the National Seamen's
 
Reform Movement. I discussed Foot's highly selective
 
account of the origins of the strike in Lobster 25.
 
 
Historian of the CPGB Willie Thompson writes that 'the
 
Prime Minister indicted the CP (quite inaccurately)
 
for fomenting and organising the strike....accusing
 
King Street of having organised it with the deliberate
 
purpose of inflicting damage on the national economy.'
 
(emphasis added) p. 137. Actually Wilson did not
 
accuse the CPGB of deliberately trying to damage the
 
national economy, and Thompson says nothing more about
 
the alleged CPGB influence on the strike.
 
175. Blackburn and Cockburn (eds.) p. 175
 
176. His statement is reproduced in his The Labour
 
Government 1964-70 Penguin 1974, pp. 308-11.
 
177. On this the evidence is incomplete and
 
contradictory. On the one hand Dr Raymond Challinor
 
told me that he discussed this with Jim Slater just
 
before the latter's death, and Slater told him that he
 
had never met Bert Ramelson, that he had told Wilson
 
this, and that Wilson had acknowledged that he had
 
been misinformed. But in his history of the CPGB
 
Beckett tells us that Slater was part of a 'left
 
caucus.... people who had a high regard for [CPGB
 
Industrial Organiser] Ramelson'. Beckett p. 182
 
178. Beckett p. 175, Willie Thompson pp. 138/9.
 
179. This is attributed to Ramelson in Seamus Milne's
 
obituary of him in the Guardian, 16 April 1994.
 
180. Blake Baker, one of the media experts on the
 
CPGB, who wrote for the Daily Telegraph for many
 
years, on p. 96 of his The Far Left wrote of the
 
subsidies from Moscow: 'No one has ever been able to
 
produce evidence, let alone prove it. ... All that
 
would be necessary is a car or a taxicab to collect a
 
suitcase full of money.' Is Baker hinting here that he
 
knew about the cash from Moscow and how it was
 
delivered?
 
181. Spycatcher p. 175 Falber's account is in Changes,
 
16-19 November 1991. In it he writes: First, did the
 
authorities know about it [the Moscow money]? I think
 
they did.'
 
182. This suggests either that the CPGB had a
 
high-level MI5 mole in its ranks who has never been
 
identified, or that SIS had a hitherto unknown agent
 
inside the Soviet intelligence apparatus.
 
183. Summers, p. 191
 
184. Something similar happened in the United States
 
where the people who handled the secret Soviet Union
 
donations to the CPUSA, Morris and Jack Childs, were
 
actually FBI agents. Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics
 
II: Essays on Oswald, Mexico and Cuba (Green Archive
 
Publications, Skokie, Illinois, USA 1995), p. 93,
 
citing David J. Garrow's The FBI and Martin Luther
 
King (Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1981).
 
185. This was a staple of the subversive-hunters in
 
the mid 1970s. But compare and contrast Geoffrey
 
Stewart-Smith's Not To Be Trusted: Left Wing Extremism
 
in the Labour and Liberal Parties of February 1974,
 
with his 1979 Hidden Face of the Labour Party, 1979.
 
By 1979 he has added Trotskyist groups in the Labour
 
Party to the CPGB as 'the threat'.
 
186. The Independent, 1 October 1992.
 
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
 
Books and articles cited
 
 
* Agee, Philip, CIA Diary: Inside the Company,
 
Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1975
 
* Agee, Philip and Wolf, Louis, Dirty Work: the CIA in
 
Western Europe, Zed Press, London, 1981
 
* Allen, V.L., The Russians Are Coming: The Politics
 
of Anti-Sovietism, Moor Press, 1987
 
* Andrew, Christopher, Secret Service, Sceptre,
 
London, 1986
 
* Atholl, Duchess of, Working Partnership, Arthur
 
Barker, London, 1958
 
* Baker, Blake, The Far Left, Weidenfeld and Nicolson,
 
London, 1981
 
* Beckett, Francis, Enemy Within: The Rise and Fall of
 
the British Communist Party, John Murray, London, 1995
 
* Benn, Tony, Against the Tide; Diaries 1973-6,
 
Hutchinson, London, 1989
 
* Benn, Tony, Office Without Power; Dairies 1968-72,
 
Arrow, London, 1988
 
* Blackburn, Robin and Cockburn, Alexander, The
 
Incompatibles: trade union militancy and the
 
consensus, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1967
 
* Blank, Stephen, Industry and Government in Britain:
 
the Federation of British Industries in Politics,
 
1945-64, Saxon House, Farnborough (UK), 1973
 
* Bloch, Jonathan and Fitzgerald, Patrick, British
 
Intelligence and Covert Action, Junction Books,
 
London, 1983
 
* Block, Fred L., The Origins of International
 
Economic Disorder, University of California Press,
 
London, 1977
 
* Bower, Tom, The Red Web, Arum Press, London, 1989
 
* Bower, Tom, The Perfect English Spy, Heinemann,
 
London, 1995
 
* Bradley, Ian, Breaking the Mould? The Birth and
 
Prospects of the Social Democratic Party, Martin
 
Robertson, Oxford, 1981
 
* Campbell, John, Roy Jenkins: A Biography, Weidenfeld
 
and Nicolson, London, 1983
 
* Carew, Anthony, Labour under the Marshall Plan,
 
Manchester University Press, Manchester, 1987.
 
* Carruthers, Susan L., Winning Hearts and Minds:
 
British Governments, the Media and Colonial
 
Counter-Insurgency 1944-60, University of Leicester
 
Press, Leicester and New York, 1995
 
* Castle, Barbara, The Castle Diaries 1974-76, Book
 
Club Associates, London, 1980
 
* Chapple, Frank, Sparks Fly, Michael Joseph, London,
 
1984
 
* Cockett, Richard, Twilight of Truth, Weidenfeld and
 
Nicolson, London, 1989
 
* Coleman, Peter, The Liberal Conspiracy, Collier
 
Macmillan, London, 1989
 
* Crofts, William, Coercion or Persuasion: Propaganda
 
in Britain after 1945, Routledge, London, 1989
 
* Crosland, Susan, Tony Crosland, Coronet, London,
 
1982
 
* Crouch, Colin (ed.), State and Economy in
 
Contemporary Capitalism, Croom Helm, London, 1979
 
* Crozier, Brian, Free Agent, HarperCollins, London,
 
1993
 
* Darke, Bob, The Communist Technique in Britain,
 
Penguin, London, 1952
 
* Davenport-Hines, R.P.T. (ed.), Speculators and
 
Patriots, Frank Cass, London, 1986
 
* Desai, Radhika, Intellectuals and Socialism: 'Social
 
Democrats' and the Labour Party, Lawrence and Wishart,
 
London, 1994
 
* Dittberner, Job L., The End of Ideology and American
 
Social Thought, UMI Press, USA, 1979
 
* Dockrill, Michael, and Young, John W. (eds.),
 
British Foreign Policy 1945-56, Macmillan, London,
 
1989
 
* Dorril, Stephen and Ramsay, Robin, Smear! Wilson and
 
the Secret State, Fourth Estate, London, 1991
 
* Driver, Christopher, The Disarmers, Hodder and
 
Stoughton, London, 1964
 
* Eringer, Robert, The Global Manipulators, Pentacle
 
Books, Bristol, 1980
 
* Farr, Lee Barbara The Development and Impact of
 
Right-wing Politics in England 1918-39, unpublished
 
PhD thesis, University of Illinois, 1976
 
* Ferris, Paul, The New Militants, Penguin,
 
Harmondsworth, 1972
 
* Finer, S.E., Anonymous Empire; A Study of the Lobby
 
in Great Britain, Pall Mall, London, 1969
 
* Foley, Charles, Legacy of Strife; Cyprus from
 
rebellion to civil war, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1964
 
* Foot, Paul, Who Framed Colin Wallace?, Macmillan,
 
London, 1989
 
* Foot, Paul, The Politics of Harold Wilson, Penguin,
 
Harmondsworth, 1968.
 
* Frazier, Howard (ed.), Uncloaking the CIA, Collier
 
Macmillan, London, 1978
 
* Gordievsky, Oleg, Next Stop Execution, Macmillan,
 
London, 1995
 
* U.S. Government Printing Office, Foreign Relations
 
of the United States, Washington DC, 1977
 
* Hamilton, Willie, Blood on the Walls, Bloomsbury,
 
London, 1992
 
* Harrod, Jeffrey, Trade Union Foreign Policy,
 
Macmillan, London, 1972
 
* Haseler, Stephen, The Gaitskellites, Macmillan,
 
London, 1969
 
* The Battle for Britain: Thatcher and the New
 
Liberals, I.B. Tauris, London, 1989
 
* Hastings, Stephen, The Drums of Memory, Leo Cooper,
 
London, 1994.
 
* Hatch, Alden, Clare Booth Luce, Heinneman, London,
 
1956
 
* Healey, Denis, The Time of My Life, Michael Joseph,
 
London, 1989
 
* Heilbrunn, Otto, The Soviet Secret Services, George
 
Allen, London, 1956
 
* Higham, Charles, Wallis, Pan, London, 1988
 
* Hinton, James, 'Militant Housewives: the British
 
Housewives' League and the Attlee Government' in
 
History Workshop, Autumn 1994
 
* Hirsch, Fred and Fletcher, Richard, CIA and the
 
Labour Movement, Spokesman, Nottingham, 1977
 
* Hoe, Alan, David Stirling, Little Brown and Company,
 
London, 1993
 
* Institute for Historical Research, Witness Seminar
 
transcript (manuscript), Campaign for Democratic
 
Socialism, London, 1990
 
* Institute for Historical Research, Witness Seminar
 
transcript (manuscript), The Launch of the SDP
 
1979-83, London, 1991
 
* Jenkins, Clive, All Against the Collar, Methuen,
 
London, 1990
 
* Jenkins, Roy, A Life At the Centre, Macmillan,
 
London, 1991
 
* Kaiser, Philip, Journeying Far and Wide, Maxwell
 
Macmillan International, Oxford, 1992
 
* Keating, Joan, Roman Catholics, Christian Democracy
 
and the British labour movement 1910-1960, unpublished
 
PhD thesis, University of Manchester, 1992
 
* Kisch, Richard, The Private Life of Public
 
Relations, MacGibbon and Kee, London, 1964
 
* Kwitney, Jonathan, Endless Enemies, Congdon and
 
Weed, New York, 1984
 
* Lasch, Christopher, 'The Cultural Cold War: a short
 
history of the Congress for Cultural Freedom', in
 
Barton J. Bernstein (ed.) Towards a New Past:
 
Dissenting Essays in American History, Vintage Books,
 
(Random House), New York, 1969
 
* Loftus, John, The Belarus Secret, Penguin,
 
Harmondsworth, 1983
 
* Lucas, W. Scott and Morris, C.J., 'A Very British
 
Crusade: the Information Research Department and the
 
Beginning of the Cold War', in Aldrich, Richard J.
 
(ed.), British Intelligence, Strategy and the Cold
 
War, Routledge, London, 1992
 
* MacShane, Denis, International Labour and the
 
Origins of the Cold War, Clarendon, Oxford, 1992
 
* McIvor, Arthur 'Political blacklisting and
 
anti-socialist activity between the Wars' in British
 
Society for the Study of Labour History, vol. 51, no.
 
1, Spring 1988; and 'A Crusade for Capitalism:the
 
Economic League, 1919-39' in the Journal of
 
Contemporary History, vol. 23, 1978
 
* McShane, Harry with Joan Smith, No Mean Fighter,
 
Pluto Press, London, 1978
 
* Mahl, Tom, "48 land": The United States, British
 
Intelligence and World War II, unpublished PhD thesis,
 
Kent State University, 1994
 
* Mayhew, Christopher, Time To Explain, Century
 
Hutchinson, London, 1987
 
* Merrick, Ray, 'The Russia Committee of the British
 
Foreign Office and the Cold War, 1946-47' in Journal
 
of Contemporary History, vol. 20, 1985
 
* Middlemas, Keith, Politics in Industrial Society,
 
Andre Deutsch, London, 1979
 
* Mikardo, Ian, Back-bencher, Weidenfeld and Nicolson,
 
London, 1988
 
* Milne, Seamus, The Enemy Within, Verso, London, 1994
 
* Minkin, Lewis, The Labour Party Conference, Allen
 
Lane, London, 1978
 
* Minkin, Lewis, The Contentious Alliance, University
 
of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, 1991
 
* Mosbacher, M.O., 'The British Communist Movement and
 
Moscow: How the demise of the Soviet Union affected
 
the Communist Party and its Successor Organisations',
 
M.A. Dissertation, University of Exeter, 1995
 
* Nicholson, Marjorie, The TUC Overseas, Allen and
 
Unwin, London, 1986
 
* Newton, Scott and Porter, Dilwyn, Modernisation
 
Frustrated, Unwin Hyman, London, 1988.
 
* Owen, David, Time To Declare, Penguin, London, 1992
 
* Peck, Winslow, 'The AFL-CIA' in Frazier (ed.)
 
* Phillips, Jim, The Great Alliance: Economic Recovery
 
and the Problems of Power 1945-51, Pluto Press, London
 
1996
 
* Pimlott, Ben, Harold Wilson, HarperCollins, London,
 
1992
 
* Pincher, Chapman, Inside Story, Sidgwick and
 
Jackson, London, 1978
 
* The Truth About Dirty Tricks, Sidgwick and Jackson,
 
London, 1991
 
* Pisani, Sallie, The CIA and the Marshall Plan,
 
University of Edinburgh Press, Edinburgh, 1992.
 
* Pritt, D.N., Brasshats and Bureaucrats, Lawrence and
 
Wishart, London, 1966
 
* Pugh, Patricia, Educate, Agitate, Organise: 100
 
Years of Fabian Socialism, Methuen, London, 1984
 
* Ranelagh, John, The Agency: the rise and decline of
 
the CIA, Sceptre, London, 1988
 
* Richter, Irving, Political Purpose in Trade Unions,
 
Allen and Unwin, London, 1973
 
* Roberts, Ernie, Strike Back, Ernie Roberts,
 
Orpington, Kent, 1994
 
* Seldon, Anthony, and Ball, Stuart (eds.), The
 
Conservative Century: the Conservative Party since
 
1900, Oxford University Press, 1994
 
* Shaw, Eric, Discipline and Discord in the Labour
 
Party, Manchester University Press, Manchester, 1988
 
* Shoup, Laurence H. and Minter, William, Imperial
 
Brain Trust, Monthly Review Press, London and New
 
York, 1977
 
* Simpson, Christopher, Blowback: America's
 
Recruitment of Nazis and its Effects on the Cold War,
 
Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, 1988
 
* Smith, Joseph, B., Portrait of a Cold Warrior,
 
Ballantine, New York, 1986
 
* Smith, Richard Harris, OSS: the Secret History of
 
America's Central First Intelligence Agency,
 
University of California Press, 1972
 
* Smith, Lyn, 'Covert British Propaganda; The
 
Information Research Department: 1974-77', in
 
Millennium: Journal of International Studies, vol. 9
 
No. 1
 
* Stephenson, Hugh, Claret and Chips, Michael Joseph,
 
London, 1982
 
* Sulzberger, C.L., A Long Row of Candles, Macdonald,
 
London, 1969
 
* Summers, Anthony, Official and Confidential: the
 
Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover, Victor Gollancz,
 
London,1993
 
* Taylor, Philip M., 'The Projection of Britain
 
Abroad, 1945-51', in Dockrill (ed.)
 
* Thompson, Don and Larson, Rodney, Where were you,
 
brother?, War on Want, London, 1978
 
* Thompson, Willie, The Good Old Cause; British
 
Communism 1920-1991, Pluto Press, London, 1992
 
* Verrier, Anthony, Through the Looking Glass,
 
Jonathan Cape, London, 1982
 
* Verrier, Anthony, The Road to Zimbabwe 1890-1980,
 
Jonathan Cape, London, 1986
 
* Webber, G.C., The Ideology of the British Right,
 
1919-39, Croom Helm, London, 1986
 
* Weiler, Peter, British Labour and the Cold War,
 
Stanford University Press, California, 1985
 
* Wigham, Eric, What's Wrong with the Unions?,
 
Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1961
 
* Williams, Francis, Nothing So Strange, Cassell,
 
London, 1970.
 
* Wilson, H.H. 'Techniques of Pressure -
 
Anti-Nationalisation Propaganda in Britain', in Public
 
Opinion Quarterly, Summer 1951
 
* Windlesham, Lord, Communication and Political Power,
 
Cape, London, 1966
 
* Winks, Robin, Cloak and Gown, Collins Harvill,
 
London, 1987
 
* Wright, Peter, with Greengrass, Paul, Spycatcher,
 
Viking, New York, 1987
 
* Wrigley, Chris (ed.), Warfare, Diplomacy and
 
Politics, Hamish Hamilton, London, 1986
 
* Yakovlev, Nikolai, CIA Target: the USSR, Progress,
 
Moscow, English edition 1982
 
* Young, Kenneth (ed.), The Diaries of Sir Robert
 
Bruce Lockhart, Vol. 2 1939-65, Macmillan, London,
 
1980
 
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 

Revision as of 23:36, 19 April 2006