| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The case of Edward Snowden, who in May 2013 revealed a huge number of National Security Agency codes, has again raised the question of motivation in espionage and disclosure of documents.
Espionage is a crime with complex, multi-faceted motivational factors that do not lend themselves to easy explanation. Most cases present a singular mosaic of intersecting psychosocial forces which culminate in a decision to engage in the crime. Espionage is committed by individuals from the lower middle to upper middle classes; unlike street crime, it is rarely, if ever, committed by the poor. What drives people of middle class privilege to choose to commit such a heinous crime?
The current model, postulated by numerous scholars and simplified here, holds that espionage occurs at the collision of an opportunity, a perceived life crisis, and a moral failing, which is then actuated by a trigger. 1 The spy must have an opportunity, which usually translates into access to information or a person. Access to information is typically gained through the holding of a security clearance. Such a trusted insider has minimally restrained access to classified information, and that access is usually defined by position. A senior scientist working on satellite systems obviously has significant access to classified satellite data but may have almost no access to human intelligence (HUMINT)-and vice versa. Conversely, and perhaps surprisingly, according to one study, 25 percent of known spies since World War II have held no security clearance. 2 These spies usually acted in concert with another individual (often a spouse or lover), or simply knew someone who did have access. This was the case in the Boyce-Lee case in California wherein Christopher Boyce held a security clearance and Dalton Lee did not. 3 Access, however derived, represents the most common opportunity to commit espionage.
|