Remarks by the Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service

CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

REMARKS BY THE CHIEF OF THE SECRET INTELLIGENCE SERVICE

8 December 2016

Vauxhall Cross

Introduction

Good morning. I am pleased to welcome you all here to Vauxhall Cross, the headquarters of the Secret Intelligence Service, or MI6 as we are popularly known. I say ‘pleased’, though it’s not without a degree of trepidation! The audience in this room is somewhat at odds with the fact which defines us: that we are a secret organisation. Stimulating though they are, appearances such as these are not something I intend to undertake frequently. And of course there are definite limits to what I am prepared to say. Our value depends on our ability to keep secret that which we must. Above all else, we owe that to the brave men and women who work with us to obtain the intelligence we need, often at great personal risk.

These people, who we call agents, are not usually staff members of MI6. They will never enter our headquarters; they will usually not be British. Their motives for helping the UK are as diverse as the human race itself. But they have one thing in common: they take risks to make you and your families safer. More than they or you can ever know, the people of this country, and those of our allies, are deeply in their debt.

So, as the head of a secret organisation, why am I here? Because everything we do at MI6, we do in the public’s name. It follows that a vital underpinning of our work is public confidence. Confidence that we uphold the values we defend; confidence that we always act within the law; confidence that we maintain the capabilities necessary to counter the threats this country faces. In short, confidence that you have the secret service you deserve. We cannot be completely transparent. We must ask for your trust. But that request sits easier, I think, if we have said what we can about our character: the values and principles that run through all of our activities.

I’m also motivated to tell our side of the story as a corrective to the frequently misleading portrayal of MI6 in popular culture. I’m conflicted about Bond. He has created a powerful brand for MI6 – as C, the real life version of M – there are few people who will not come to lunch if I invite them. Many of our counterparts envy the sheer global recognition of our acronym. And, to be fair, there are a few aspects of the genre that do resonate in real life; fierce dedication to the defence of Britain, for example. The real-life ‘Q’ would want me to say that we too enjoy (and indeed need) a deep grasp of gadgetry. But that’s pretty much where the similarity ends. And, were Mr. Bond to apply to join MI6 now, he would have to change his ways.

I will talk to you today about the modern-day MI6. I will outline the threats this country faces, whether in the form of international terrorism or from hybrid warfare; in the physical world, and in cyber-space. And I will talk about some of the ways in which we help to counter those threats. In doing so, I aim to set out for you how the UK benefits from having a modern and capable secret intelligence service; one of the few truly global intelligence services and one of the best in the world. A Service that is tuned to the challenges of globalisation, one that seizes the opportunities presented by modern technology to ensure that the data revolution works to our favour, not that of our enemies; a Service whose staff embody the ideals which define modern Britain and which they strive each day to defend.

As C, I will inevitably focus on MI6’s role in protecting Britain’s national security. I do, though, want to take a moment to recognise something which sets Britain apart when it comes to modern espionage. And that is teamwork. In GCHQ, we have one of the best signals intelligence services in the world. They overcome the most complex linguistic, analytical and technical challenges imaginable to keep our country safe. MI5 possess world-leading investigative capabilities, working tirelessly to track and disrupt threats to a degree you will – rightly – never properly understand. But the key point that sets us apart as an intelligence community is our ability to work together. We have powerful, but distinct, capabilities. We are able to succeed through our ability to fuse them together; to become far more than the sum of our parts. This is more challenging than it may sound and is a capability the vast majority of our competitors lack. You are safer because of it.

And, of course, this teamwork extends beyond our boundaries. I want to pay particular tribute to the strength of the intelligence relationship with the US and our other 5EYES counterparts, and the quality of the work we do with our European partners, France and Germany foremost amongst them. We share values and we face common threats. I’m often asked what effect the big political changes of 2016, BREXIT and the US election result, will have on these relationships. My answer is that I will aim for, and expect, continuity. These relationships are long lasting and the personal bonds between us are strong. The threats that we faced before these events have not gone away. The joint capabilities we had before, exist now. Indeed, they are getting stronger. The need for the deepest co-operation can only grow. And I am determined that MI6 remains a ready and highly effective partner; just as the UK is and will be. These partnerships save lives in all of our countries.

The Threats

So, to terrorism, perhaps the most obvious threat faced by modern Britain, and one on which I have worked almost uninterrupted since 9/11.The root causes of the problem go far beyond the remit of intelligence and security services. We can help the government understand these issues, as we always have. But the core of our job – in concert with MI5, GCHQ and the police – is to identify and disrupt immediate threats. When I joined the Service, counter-terrorism was a niche activity. It is now one of MI6’s three headline missions. And it has changed the nature of our work; covert operations alongside traditional intelligence gathering have taken on a renewed importance. The emphasis now is not just on finding things out, but on taking action against what we find.

The scale of the threat is unprecedented. The UK intelligence and security services have disrupted 12 terrorist plots in the UK since June 2013. And MI5 and the police continue to run hundreds of investigations into those intent on carrying out or supporting terrorist atrocities against our citizens. As I speak, the highly organised external attack planning structures within Daesh, even as they face military threat, are plotting ways to project violence against the UK and our allies without ever having to leave Syria.

We face a threat that exploits failed states within a connected world. So, we cannot pull up the draw bridge. Instead, we need to take the fight to the enemy, penetrating terrorist organisations ‘upstream’; by that I mean as close to the source as possible. In footballing terms, it’s about always ensuring you are playing in the opponent’s half. Our job, as it always has been, is to recruit and run secret agents. We have been doing this since 1909, but I can assure you that it is a technique that remains as effective today as it ever was. I will not seek to hide the challenges that come with work against an organisation as murderously efficient as Daesh, but MI6 and GCHQ intelligence has on numerous occasions given MI5 and the Police the information they need to identify and stop threats in the UK and to our allies. As importantly, it has also allowed us to work with partners overseas, most often through their criminal justice systems, but also in support of British or coalition military operations, to prevent attacks and degrade terrorist capabilities.

In countering terrorism, some of our agents operate in the most dangerous and hostile environments on earth. They know that the result of being identified as an MI6 agent could be their death. But they do what they do because they believe in protecting their country and religion from the evil that Daesh and other terrorist organisations represent.
In conducting this work, we have learnt tough lessons. Lessons that the Intelligence and Security Committee’s Detainee Inquiry, reviewing our engagement post 9/11, will make plain. The challenges I am confident they will describe still exist today. But we have used the last 15 years to develop new and effective capabilities. We can put our officers where they need to be, in some of the most challenging locations imaginable, with the support they need to stay safe and the guidance and training required to navigate complex and ethically hazardous environments. We can work with a wide range of partner countries overseas; partners who often do not share our laws but who do know our red lines.

We are proud of the role we play in the UK’s spectrum of national security capabilities, from soldiers on the battlefield, to spies in the shadows, to police on the streets. Together, they afford us protection and advantage over our enemies. But of course our ultimate protection lies in our values.

Because beyond any of our capabilities, it is legitimacy that is the strongest weapon against international terrorism. If you doubt the link between legitimacy and effective counter-terrorism, then – albeit negatively – the unfolding tragedy in Syria will, I fear, provide proof. I believe the Russian conduct in Syria, allied with that of Asad’s discredited regime, will, if they do not change course, provide a tragic example of the perils of forfeiting legitimacy. In defining as a terrorist anyone who opposes a brutal government, they alienate precisely that group that has to be on side if the extremists are to be defeated. Meanwhile, in Aleppo, Russia and the Syrian regime seek to make a desert and call it peace. The human tragedy is heart-breaking

We should, all of us, including intelligence officers, approach analysis of Syria with humility. The facts on the ground are staggeringly complex. The plight of Syrians continues to worsen. I cannot say with any certainty what the next year will bring. But what I do know is this: we cannot be safe from the threats that emanate from that land unless the civil war is brought to an end. And brought to an end in a way that recognises the interests of more than a minority of its people and their international backers.

Strategic Advantage

If counter-terrorism represents the ‘urgent’ problem, then arguably the ‘important’, longer-term one is the preservation of Britain’s capacity to take the right decisions in an increasingly complex, multi-polar and opaque international order. We coin this work as providing ‘strategic advantage’. This is not new; we have been doing it since our creation when we revealed the secret aspect of Germany’s military expansion. We are not a self-tasking organisation; we obtain intelligence based only on the questions set for us by government. But what was true even in 1909 is true today: the UK prospers on its wits, not its past or scale. To that end, MI6’s role is to obtain the secret intelligence which, fused with other sources of information, allows the government to make the right decisions, at the right time. To illuminate the most impenetrable policy dilemmas and give the UK the information advantage in a competitive world.

This work has taken on a new edge when it comes to countering the increasingly dangerous phenomenon of hybrid warfare. The connectivity that is at the heart of globalisation can be exploited by States with hostile intent to further their aims deniably. They do this through means as varied as cyber-attacks, propaganda or subversion of democratic process. Our job is to give the government the information advantage; to shine a light on these activities and to help our country and our allies, in particular across Europe, build the resilience they need to protect themselves. The risks at stake are profound and represent a fundamental threat to our sovereignty; they should be a concern to all those who share democratic values.

In this arena, our opponents are often states whose very survival owes to the strength of their security capabilities; the work is complex and risky, often with the full weight of the State seeking to root us out. The most important aspect of these operations is maintaining their secrecy, so you will understand why I am not prepared to go into greater detail. Doing so would put at risk those upon whom we rely and have a moral duty to protect. But I will say that – just as in the fight against Daesh – our success in this mission will depend on our ability to win trust, harness modern technology and to work in partnership.

The Future

So much for the tasks we face today. I now want to address the future. I think we have a deserved reputation as one of the best strategic intelligence services in the World. But there is a catch: while the essence of what we do – creating relationships of trust – will remain unchanged, in this century as it has in the last, the environment in which we do it has altered out of all recognition. In short, data and the internet have turned our business on its head. They represent an existential threat combined with a golden opportunity. Analysis of data can reveal a great deal. In the hands of a skilled opponent, unconcerned by considerations of law or morality, it can cause great damage. Similarly, used lawfully with full adherence to the concepts of necessity and proportionality, it can transform our ability to spot opportunities and threats alike.

Alongside the values we defend and which define us, I believe that it will be our relationship with new technologies that will determine our effectiveness in future. I think that the intelligence services of the world will divide into two: those who get this and those who don’t. We are in the former camp.

We have understood for years that our ability to work creatively has depended on a deep understanding of our surroundings. This is as true now of our digital environment as the physical one. We need to be as fleet of foot on the highways and byways of cyberspace as we are on the streets of Raqqa. This is where we reap the dividends of our deep partnership with GCHQ. This is why we will use the opportunity of growth provided by our recent funding settlement to attract those with the skills we need to effect this transformation. And this is why we need to have the legal basis and capabilities now provided by the Investigatory Powers - or IP - Act.

Incidentally, despite being C, I too am a member of the public and fully understand that, when it comes to access to data, the public will need and want to hold us to a particularly high standard of account. This is an issue across both the public and private sector that raises a range of novel and important ethical and legal issues. That is why I was delighted by the quality of debate that took place during the passage of the IP Bill, based in part on David Anderson’s excellent review.

The IP Act brings with it stringent checks and balances, including a double-lock of Ministerial and independent judicial authorisation for the most intrusive activities. All of our operations continue to be overseen by Ministers, Parliament and independent Judicial Commissioners who can access and review our records. MI6 is accountable and so is every single officer who works here.

These checks and balances are vital as a means of ensuring your confidence, even as our activities remain secret. But that cannot be the whole story. The concepts of ‘cyber’ and ‘bulk data analysis’ are frequently described in other-worldly terms which belie their true nature: that they are man-made phenomena. When it comes to cyber warfare, it is not computers that are attacking us; it is people using computers. It is the combination of people and machines that form the threat, and this, incidentally, is the reason that I see our third mission, Cyber, as a core role for MI6 as well as for our sigint partners.

So the ultimate protection lies in our character and that of the country we serve. My officers are not from another planet; they are representative of the wider public and driven by the simple desire to protect our country. There is a pernicious myth that, somehow, intelligence services are moral equivalents. That the end justifies the means, whatever the cost. Much of the fictional portrayal of us is along those lines; and it is wrong. We do things for our country that would not be justifiable in pursuit of private interests. But they are necessary, proportionate and legal in pursuit of national security. Every single officer here understands and respects the heavy responsibility, and has the integrity required, to utilise these powers. We are a human organisation and we will make mistakes. We will have the courage to learn from them. But, fundamentally, we understand that if we undermine the values we defend, even in the name of defending them, then we have lost.

People