A rare student in my childhood asked parents or teachers such a question. Because we all knew perfectly well: intelligence officers are ours, Soviet, while spies are always American (for some reason, I didn’t even imagine spies from other countries). True, there were also German spies, but this was earlier, during the war years ...
During my childhood, American spies really existed and tried to find out all our strategic secrets ... And the Soviet intelligence officers in response - their strategic secrets. The only difference was that their spies were spying while our scouts were scouting.
Our scouts have always been knights without fear and reproach, and their spies, in order to achieve their unseemly goals, could go to any meanness and any crime. And all the films that I then watched, all the books that I read, only confirmed this my firm conviction.
Why am I telling all this?
Yes, I just re-read the story of Boris Vasilyev “The Dawns Here Are Quiet” recently. A talented work of a very talented writer... But on one episode, I seemed to stumble. I didn't stumble before, but now...
Remember when foreman Vaskov with the girls finds two dead Germans. They were finished off by their own, because these two were taken out from the battlefield as seriously wounded ...
They are not people! - Outraged to the very depths of the soul by such cruelty of the enemy, Vaskov declares. - Beasts! With two arms, two legs, and beasts! So, their law is this: finish off the wounded!
And I completely agreed with him before. You can’t do this: your wounded - and ...
And now I'm thinking. And he imagined the opposite situation: when a group of our saboteurs was thrown into the German rear, and there they, faced with the Germans, suffered losses in killed and wounded. With the dead, everything is clear, they need to be buried ... But what about the wounded? All the more seriously injured? ..
There are three options here. The first, losing in advance: to turn back, without completing the task, but saving the lives of wounded comrades at the same time. And bring yourself to the tribunal ...
Second: leave the wounded to their fate and move on. Dangerous because there was a fight, a lot of enemy soldiers roam the area, and therefore there is a high probability that those who remain may be captured. And then interrogations, torture... and the purpose of the task may become known to the enemy, which means that its implementation will also be in jeopardy. True, our saboteurs can accidentally meet partisans and leave the wounded with them, but this happened more often in films and books than in real life ...
The third option remains - the most cruel, but the only possible one. The one that was used (who knows, maybe with pain in the heart) by German saboteurs. By the way, the second option did not suit them at all, since there could not be any such German partisans in our rear.
True, in the books and films of the Soviet era, our wounded, finding themselves in the same hopeless situation, said goodbye to life themselves. As, for example, the same Rita Osyanina. Didn't the chairman guess, leaving her revolver, that she would do just that? Didn't even such a thought cross his mind, especially after Rita's insistent request to take care of her little son?
Such is the literary (and cinematic) cliche of Soviet times: our seriously wounded, in order not to interfere with their comrades, shoot themselves, the enemies finish off their own. But are there not enough other clichés about our “correct” and their “wrong”, even in generally good works of that time ...
Let's take, for example, Alexei Dudarev's play The Choice, about how a tank crew died saving the lives of children. A wonderful work, it shocked me to the very depths of my soul at one time ... Only here is one episode ...
The end of the war, the fighting is already on the territory of Germany ... And now the Germans, in order to prevent our offensive, put up a human shield of German children in front of their trenches and bunkers. And our soldiers go on the attack without firing and at the same time suffer unreasonably large losses ...
As Stanislavsky said: “I don’t believe!” I do not believe that our soldiers, having seen all the atrocities of the invaders on their land, in the very last days of the war, so massively and voluntarily went to their deaths only for the sake of saving the German "Kinders". I don’t believe that German soldiers, even in a completely hopeless situation, could do this to their children! If it were with prisoners of war, I would have believed it. With children from the concentration camp - also likely. But with their own, German ...
It's like with the same scouts and spies from my distant childhood. Some nobly scouted enemy secrets, while others, bastards, simply spied ...
Gennady Ovlasenko.
Volunteer - this is a person who voluntarily enters the active army of one of the belligerents, he loses the status of a person of a neutral state, the actions of a volunteer are lawful if he joins an army waging war in defense of his country from foreign enslavement.
Mercenary - is a person who 1) is specifically recruited locally or abroad to fight in an armed conflict; 2) actually takes a direct part in hostilities; 3) guided primarily by the desire for personal gain, and who is in fact promised by a party or on behalf of a party to the conflict, material remuneration substantially in excess of the remuneration promised or paid to combatants of the same rank and with the same functions from among the personnel of the armed forces of this sides; 4) is neither a citizen of a Party to the conflict nor a permanent resident of the territory controlled by a Party to the conflict; 5) is not a member of the armed forces of a party to the conflict; 6) not sent by a state that is not a party to the conflict to perform official duties as a member of its armed forces; 7) recruited to participate in pre-planned acts of violence aimed at overthrowing the government of any state, undermining its constitutional order or violating its territorial integrity and inviolability. A mercenary does not have the right to the status of a combatant and a prisoner of war, he is subject to criminal liability under the laws of the state that captured him.
Military advisers and instructors – these are civilians or military personnel who are under the political leadership or military command of a belligerent state in order to provide political advice to the leadership or train personnel of the Armed Forces of a foreign state in handling the supplied equipment, weapons. Their legal status is not defined by the MP, it is determined in bilateral international treaties. Military advisers and instructors are not part of the Armed Forces of the belligerent states and, in terms of their legal status, approach non-combatants.
Fighting non-combatants. In Afghanistan, on the one hand, the forces of the state, combatants, are fighting, on the other hand, the forces of the unrecognized government of Afghanistan, fighting non-combatants, the Taliban. According to Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention for the Protection of Victims of War of 1949, Art. as combatants”, Article 44: “if they are captured, they fall under the regime of combatants”
International treatment of prisoners of war, wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of the Armed Forces at sea during an interstate conflict. The treatment of this category of persons is regulated mainly by Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, 1949. And Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of the Armed Forces at Sea, 1949
Wounded and sick civilians and military personnel who are in an area of armed conflict who, due to injury, illness, other physical disorder or disability, are in need of medical attention or care and who refrain from any hostile action. This category also includes women in labor, newborns, infirm, pregnant women. Civilians and members of the armed forces who are in danger at sea or in other waters as a result of an accident with the ship or aircraft carrying them and who refrain from any hostile act are considered to be shipwrecked.
Regardless of which belligerent they belong to, these individuals enjoy patronage and protection and have the right to humane treatment; they are provided with the greatest possible extent and in the shortest possible time medical care. Once in the power of the enemy, the wounded, sick and shipwrecked are considered prisoners of war, and the rules of the MP regarding prisoners of war apply to them.
At all times, and especially after the battle, the parties must accept all possible measures to find and pick up the wounded and sick and protect them from robbery and mistreatment. Robbery of the dead (looting) is not allowed. When circumstances permit, truce or cease-fire agreements should be negotiated to pick up the wounded left on the battlefield and exchange them.
The parties to the conflict must register all data that will help to identify the wounded, sick, shipwrecked and dead of the enemy side who came into their power. These data must be brought to the attention of the national prisoner of war information office for transmission to the Power in which these persons are registered, through a central prisoner of war agency to be established in a neutral country.
It is forbidden to kill or exterminate the wounded, sick, shipwrecked, deliberately leave them without medical care or care, deliberately create conditions for their infection, subject these persons, even with their consent, to physical injury, medical or scientific experiments, removal of tissues or organs for transplantation , except when it is justified by the state of health of the person and complies with generally accepted medical standards. The mentioned persons have the right to refuse any surgical operation. A side compelled to leave the wounded or sick to the enemy must leave with them, as far as military conditions permit, a part of its medical personnel and equipment to assist in their care.
During the Austro-Italian-French War (1859), Swiss citizen Henri Dunant organized help for the wounded after the Battle of Solferino. His book "Memories of Solferino" awakened the public consciousness. In 1863, the International Committee for the Relief of the Wounded was created, today it is - International Committee of the Red Cross . ICRC- non-governmental (private) neutral Swiss organization, founder of the Red Cross movement; one of his missions– all possible assistance in respect of the Geneva Conventions. During armed conflicts, it provides protection and assistance to casualties, both military and civilian. The mandate of the ICRC to operate in times of armed conflict is based on the 4 Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols I and II of 1977, as well as on the Charter
The ICRC plays an important role in the codification of international humanitarian law, with its active participation, 4 Geneva Conventions of 1949 (“On the treatment of prisoners of war”, “On the protection of civilians in time of war”) on the protection of victims of war and Additional Protocols I and II were developed with its active participation 1977 to them. There is a representative office of the ICRC in Russia - the Moscow delegation of the ICRC.
78. Legal regime of military occupation.
Military occupation is the temporary occupation during the course of a war by the armed forces of one state of the territory of another state and the assumption of control over these territories.
According to the norms of international law, the occupied territory legally continues to be the territory of the state to which it belonged before the occupation. During the period of temporary, actual transfer of power from the hands of the legitimate government to the military authorities that have occupied the territory, these authorities are obliged to ensure public order and the life of the population, respecting the laws existing in this country. The 1949 Geneva Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War establishes that persons in occupied territory have the right to respect for their person, honor, family rights, and religious beliefs.
The occupying state is not allowed to abolish: the laws in force in the occupied territory. It can only suspend the operation of those local laws that do not meet the interests of the security of its army or the occupying power, and can also issue temporary administrative acts if necessary for the maintenance of public order. The penal acts issued by the occupying Power come into force only after they have been published and communicated to the public in their own language.
It is forbidden to destroy and destroy not only private, but also public and state property; the destruction of movable or immovable property representing the individual or collective property of individuals or the state, communities or public or cooperative organizations, which is not absolutely necessary for military operations, is recognized as illegal.
The regime of post-war occupation should be distinguished from the regime of military occupation as a measure of the responsibility of the state for aggression(for example, the regime of occupation in Germany and Japan, starting from the moment of their unconditional surrender in 1945 and until the abolition of such a regime, which was based on special international legal acts).
79. Legal regime of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of the armed forces.
See question 78.
80. Means and methods of warfare.
Means of warfare- weapons, shells, substances used by the armed forces of the belligerents to inflict harm and defeat the enemy. Methods of warfare- This is the procedure for using the means of warfare.
Means and methods of warfare are divided into prohibited (or partially prohibited) and not prohibited by international law. According to Art. 35 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the right of the parties to the conflict to choose the means and methods of warfare is not unlimited. It is forbidden to use weapons, projectiles, substances and methods of warfare capable of causing unnecessary injury or suffering or making the death of combatants inevitable, as well as leading to mass destruction and senseless destruction of property (Article 22 of the Appendix to the Hague Convention of 1907 on the laws and customs of land warfare).
International law forbids the following means and methods of warfare (land, sea, air):
· poisons or poisoned weapons, asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, similar liquids, substances and processes, as well as bacteriological weapons;
means of influencing the natural environment for hostile purposes;
any weapon, if its action is to inflict damage with fragments that are not detected in the human body using X-rays (glass, plastic, etc.); mines, booby-traps and other devices in the form of children's toys and objects medical care; any incendiary weapon against the civilian population, populated areas and non-military objects;
Other conventional weapons that may be considered to be excessively damaging or indiscriminate;
• the implementation of genocide in the occupied territory; treacherous killing or wounding of an enemy who laid down his arms or unarmed; announcing to the defenders that if they resist, they will not be spared;
· the senseless destruction of cities and towns and the destruction of enemy property, if this is not caused by military necessity;
However, international law does not prohibit military stratagem to mislead the enemy or induce him to act recklessly. Examples of such tricks are: the use of camouflage, traps, false operations and disinformation (Article 37 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949).
In connection with the development of scientific and technological progress and the increase in its level in the military-industrial complex, the means and methods of conducting air warfare occupy a special place in the international law of armed conflicts. The provisions of Additional Protocol I are aimed at protecting the civilian population from air attacks. Air attacks can only be directed against military objectives. It is prohibited to attack or threaten to attack the main purpose of which is to terrorize the civilian population.
81. The end of the war and its legal consequences.
The most common forms of cessation of hostilities are armistice and surrender. truce- temporary cessation of hostilities, carried out on the basis of mutual agreement between the participants in the armed conflict. There are two types of truce: local and general. The local truce aims to suspend hostilities between individual units and subunits in a limited area of hostilities. As a rule, it is aimed at solving particular problems (picking up the wounded, burying the dead, evacuating civilians from the besieged area, sending parliamentarians, etc.).
A general truce differs significantly from a local one. First, in the event of a general truce, hostilities are suspended throughout the entire area of the theater of operations. Secondly, a general truce under certain circumstances (for example, if the parties to the conflict have not formally declared the existence of a state of war between them) can not only suspend hostilities, but also lead to their termination.
A specific form of suspension of hostilities is the implementation by the states participating in the conflict of the decision of the UN Security Council (based on Article 40 of the UN Charter "On Interim Measures", which may include, in particular, a ceasefire, the withdrawal of troops to previously occupied positions, the liberation of certain territory and etc.).
Surrender- this is the cessation of resistance of the armed forces or part of them. As a rule, upon surrender, all weapons, military equipment, warships and aircraft are transferred to the enemy. The surrendering side is subjected to military captivity. Surrender differs from a truce in that the capitulating side is deprived of even formal equality with the winner. Under customary international law, a breach of the terms of surrender constitutes an international offense if committed at the direction of the government of the belligerent, or a war crime if committed without such indication. Such a violation could lead to either adequate military action or the punishment of those responsible as war criminals.
The main international legal means of ending the state of war between the belligerents is the conclusion of a peace treaty. Such treaties cover a wide range of issues relating to the settlement of political, economic, territorial and other problems in connection with the termination of the war and the restoration of peace between the belligerents.
The legal consequences of the end of the war come both for the belligerents and for neutral and other non-belligerent states. For belligerent states, the laws and customs of war cease to operate and normal peaceful relations are established, including diplomatic ones. For neutral states, the state of neutrality in the war ends, and for all non-belligerent states, the need to observe the regime of war zones is generally eliminated, interned citizens return, etc.
82. Law environment. General characteristics.
MEP - this is a set of principles and norms that regulate relations between the subjects of the MP regarding the protection of the environment and the rational use of natural resources for the benefit of present and future generations of people.
The formation of the MEA industry can be fully associated with the first UN Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972. This conference created United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), which is designed to coordinate international activities in the field of environmental protection, monitor the state of the environment, develop and codify MEPs, and promote the development of programs rational use natural resources, with particular regard to the interests of developing countries, to provide them with technical assistance in this area.
In 1992, the UN Conference on Environment and Development was held in Rio de Janeiro. It adopted the Rio Declaration, which builds on the principles of the Stockholm Declaration, and Forest protection principles And Agenda 21, which proposes a program of action for all governments in various areas of environmental protection for the period 1993-2000. and beyond into the 21st century.
main source law in the field of MPOS is international treaty. This is primarily due to the fact that environmental regulations may include certain technical and physical parameters and characteristics, or rely on or refer to such parameters or characteristics. Such provisions require a clear and precise statement, which is possible only in the case of the conclusion of an international treaty. However, international custom played and continues to play a certain role in the development of the MPS and the formation of its principles - the fundamental norms of this branch of MT. Soft norms. domestic law.
The Fundamental Principle of MEP is the principle that states should not, as a result of activities within their jurisdiction or control, cause damage to the environment of other states or areas beyond national jurisdiction. This principle was formulated at the Stockholm Conference (Principle 21), however, it has its roots in the principle of Roman law. This principle is a common law principle.
Another fundamental principle of MEP is the principle of state sovereignty over their national natural resources. It is, in essence, an expression of the principle of state sovereignty, which is part of the general MP. Developing states insisted on a special allocation of this principle in the field of the environment, seeking independence from rich states in the development of their own resources.
The MPOS is composed the principle that States are obliged to notify other States of emergencies or natural disasters that may lead to environmentally harmful consequences. This principle is included in such treaties as the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution of 1979, the Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident of 1986, etc.
stands out the principle that states should consult with other interested states about activities they plan to carry out that may have potentially adverse transboundary effects. This principle, for example, is contained in the 1994 Nuclear Safety Convention.
Currently shaping up precautionary approach, Whereby states should exercise caution in undertaking such an activity or undertaking such a project that has the potential to cause damage to the environment, despite the lack of full scientific justification that such damage will actually be caused. This principle is contained in the Preamble of the Convention on Biological Diversity of 1992, in the Bamako Convention on the Ban on the Import into Africa of Hazardous Wastes and on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes within Africa of 1991.
Brussels 1913 - 1st conference. 60-70s – NTR:
Stage 1– before the UN Stockholm Conference - June 1972 Stage 2- from 1972 to the conference in Rio de Janeiro - June 1992 Stage 3– after 1992 until September 2002 (Jogansburg).
3 groups of conventions:
1) conventions of a general nature - regulate relations in various areas (Convention on the Law of the Sea).
2) framework conventions - general principles environmental protection (Stockholm, Rio de Janeiro).
3) specific norms of behavior of states (Kyoto Protocol - entered into force in 2005).
Regional Conventions - Protection of the Baltic Sea.
83. Protection of the planetary environment and outer space.
Space - a vast territory stretching from the outer border of the airspace (~ 100-110 km from the Earth's surface) to the limits of the lunar orbit - the so-called. near space, and beyond, i.e. further 384 thousand km - deep space.
space law - branch of MT, a set of legal principles and norms that determine the legal regime of outer space, and determines the procedure for the activities of states in this area.
1958 - 13th session of the UN General Assembly, a decision was made to develop the norms of space law.
1963 - Declaration on the principles of the activities of states in outer space (recommendatory character).
The main sources of international space law are international treaties. Among them -
1. The Treaty on Principles for the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, 1967 (Outer Space Treaty), is open for signature in Washington and Moscow.
2. Agreement on the rescue of astronauts, the return of astronauts and the return of objects launched into outer space, 1968
3. Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, 1972 (Liability Convention),
4. Convention on the Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, 1975,
5. Agreement on the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, 1979 (Moon Agreement),
6.regional and bilateral agreements between states, between states and international organizations.
Important role in the regulation of the legal regime of outer space also play Treaty on the Prohibition of Tests of Nuclear Weapons in the Atmosphere, Outer Space and Under Water of 1963, Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Missile Defense Systems of 1972, etc.
main sources : conventional, customary, soft law (Unispace), national norms.
Basic principles. The legal regime applies to: space itself and celestial bodies, plus space objects made by man, plus the activities of states in space. There is a UN Committee on Space. UNISPACE - three conferences, the last in 1999. Applicability in this area of all the basic principles of MP.
According to the 1967 Treaty, “outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies , are not subject to national assignment neither by claiming sovereignty over them, nor by exploitation or occupation, nor by any other means."
Outer space and celestial bodies are open to exploration and use by all states without any discrimination on the basis of equality with free access to all areas of celestial bodies.
Space stations may be operated jointly, but they belong to the countries where they are registered.
Norms on saving a person in space have been developed.
Activities in outer space must comply with the MP, including the UN Charter. States are obliged to take into account the interests of other states, to avoid harmful pollution of outer space and celestial bodies.
It is forbidden to put into space and place nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction there, to test them (although it is possible to fly rockets through space and deploy conventional weapons). The moon and celestial bodies are to be used for peaceful purposes.
The moon and other celestial bodies are declared the common heritage of mankind.The prohibition of national appropriation of celestial bodies extends to their surface, subsoil and natural resources and applies to states, SIDS, legal entities and individuals. The norms established for the Moon (demilitarized regime) also apply to the orbits of the flight paths to and around the Moon. The 1979 Moon Agreement regulates in detail the procedure for carrying out scientific research on the Moon, but the leading space countries do not participate in it.
One of the problems of international space law is the problem of high-altitude delimitation of air and outer spaces. There is no definite boundary between them. Neither the MP nor the national legislations of the states contain norms establishing the boundary between these spaces. This issue has been on the agenda of the UN Committee on Outer Space for a long time.
State practice confirms the doctrinal view that the customary norm is emerging that state sovereignty does not extend to space above the orbit of the least perigee of an artificial satellite of the Earth (this height is approximately 110-140 km above sea level). A number of states (including Russia) are proposing to adopt a treaty rule defining that outer space begins from a height 100-110 km above ocean level. At the same time, when space objects are put into orbit and returned to Earth, the right of “harmless (peaceful) flight” over the territories of foreign states and at lower altitudes is retained. Such a rule would make it possible to determine the spatial sphere to which the legal regime of outer space applies.
The activities of non-governmental legal entities in outer space can only be carried out with the permission and under the supervision of the relevant state. SIDS activities are permitted in space.
If a foreign satellite fell into the territory of another state, it is necessary to pay for the damage caused.
There is a problem of clogging space with spent spacecraft.
Latin countries are dissatisfied with the broadcasting of American satellites on their territory.
Of particular importance is the region of orbits of the so-called geostationary satellites. This is the part of outer space, separated from the surface of the Earth at a distance of about 35,800 km and located in the plane of the earth's equator (such a spatial ring is also called the geostationary orbit or geostationary space).
Geostationary satellites have a number of features. The period of their revolution around the Earth is equal to the earth day, which ensures the constant position of the satellite above a certain point on the earth's equator. At the same time, a third of the Earth's surface area is in the visibility of the satellite. It creates optimal conditions for some applied types of space activities (for example, for the use of communication satellites, television broadcasting, meteorological observation, etc.). As a result, more than half of all existing satellites are located in geostationary orbit. However, only a limited number of satellites can be placed in this space, since if they are close to each other, on-board radio equipment can create mutual interference. All this was the reason for the discussion regarding the legal regime of this part of the cosmos. space. This issue is being discussed in the UN Committee on Outer Space at the present time. In 1976, seven equatorial countries (Colombia, Ecuador, Indonesia, Congo, Uganda, Zaire, Kenya) put forward claims to the geostationary orbit, in 1978 this was considered by the UN, rejected.
At the same time, certain coordinating work on the economical use of geostationary space is carried out by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). The ITU Constitution of 1992 specifies that radio frequencies and the geostationary satellite orbit are limited natural resources that must be used rationally, efficiently and economically in order to ensure equitable access to this orbit and frequencies different countries, taking into account the features geographical location some States and the special needs of developing countries. In order to rationally use the resource of the geostationary orbit and avoid mutual radio interference, ITU coordinates, allocates and registers radio frequencies and orbital positions for geostationary satellites declared by various states. At the same time, with regard to the allocation of orbital positions, one cannot speak of their national assignment.
In 1992, the UN General Assembly adopted the Principles Concerning the Use of Nuclear Power Sources (NPS) in Outer Space. The use of nuclear power sources in space should be limited only to those space flights that cannot be carried out without nuclear power sources. In order to prevent spacecraft with nuclear power sources from falling to Earth, it has been established that such satellites can be used during interplanetary flights and in sufficiently high orbits, and in low near-Earth orbits, provided that spent objects are stored in sufficiently high orbits.
planetary environment
Since our site www.site is dedicated not only to information security, which is somehow connected with intelligence and espionage, but also to intelligence itself. I would like to help the visitor understand the terminology associated with this topic. And so in this article I will try to answer the questions:
- What are scouts.
- Who is a spy.
- Who is an intelligence agent.
- Who is an intelligence resident.
A scout or spy is usually called a person for whom intelligence is the main profession. The intelligence officer has a special intelligence education and is a full-time employee of one or more intelligence agencies.
Famous Soviet Scout Richard Sorge (Ramsay) In carrying out his assignments, a professional intelligence officer may be in a foreign country under the guise of a journalist, diplomat, businessman, etc.
What are scouts?
Scouts are:
- Legal
- Illegal
"Legal" scout acts in other countries as a citizen of his country, working in one of its representative offices (for example, an embassy).
"Illegal" spy works under the guise of a citizen of the country in which he is located, or a foreigner from another, third country.
What is an intelligence agent?
An intelligence agent is an assistant to an intelligence officer who is not a professional intelligence agent, but who performs tasks for intelligence agencies.
In some cases, the importance of an agent in obtaining the necessary information is even higher than the role of a professional intelligence officer, since such people may have access to secret data that is not available to the intelligence officer.
Who is a spy?
Now let's see who is a spy? and who do we call spies?
In one of the first books on intelligence, the following wording is given: "All our employees are intelligence officers, and all enemy employees are spies."
The word "Spy" - always, all over the world was considered a despicable word. It is believed that these are people who sold the interests and secrets of their country for money.
Red Chapel
But there is a profound difference between hero scouts and corrupt spies, though both seem to have a common goal: to learn the enemy's secrets. But we can hardly call spies caught and executed during the 2nd World War in Germany, members of the "Red Chapel" who helped intelligence. They were brave and fierce anti-fascists, ready to give their lives just like those soldiers who fought the enemy at the front.
These people did not receive any monetary rewards for their work, their goal was one - to protect the people of Germany from fascism. There have been many similar cases in the history of intelligence.
Who is a resident?
Another term you may come across in the world of intelligence: resident. This is an intelligence officer in charge of the residency, that is, a group of agents and intelligence officers subordinate to him.
And of course, you need to know who the counterintelligence officers are. Counterintelligence exists in every country. This is an organization designed to fight and protect against enemy intelligence, to interfere with its collection of classified data. Counterintelligence officers carry out difficult operations to expose and detain enemy spies.
Many people remember that in Soviet times the word "spy" was equated with a curse. So they called the enemies of the people, traitors, deceivers and traitors. Every pioneer dreamed of finding a spy and handing him over to the authorities. Whereas the term "scout" evoked only positive associations among our compatriots and was even fanned with a certain romantic halo. Take at least the on-screen Stirlitz from Seventeen Moments of Spring. So why are essentially identical concepts invested in such a different meaning? Let's try to figure out the difference between a scout and a spy.
Definitions
Scout- a person whose functions include the collection, study and generalization of information about a probable or current enemy. Depending on the tasks performed and methods of work, it can be military or undercover. In the first case, this is a uniformed serviceman who penetrates the enemy's location in order to collect certain information. The received data is transmitted to the command and used by them to assess the situation and make decisions. Undercover intelligence agents often act under the guise of diplomats and have immunity status. Some of them work undercover and do not have direct contact with their offices. Called illegal intelligence officers, they resort to illegal methods of obtaining information that fall under the concepts of "theft of information" and "espionage".
Scout
Spy- a person engaged in the secret collection of information about one of the participants in the conflict in favor of the other side. Often, his activities involve the theft of officially classified information under the leadership of the special services of foreign states. In their work, spies use various secret techniques, whether it be spying or eavesdropping using special technical devices. Often, an agent infiltrates the camp of the enemy and pretends to be “his own”. Spies are both full-time employees of foreign intelligence, and citizens of the state, recruited by the opposite side and transmitting secret information to it.
Comparison
Let's try to look deeper into the essence of each of the concepts. Let's start with the fact that the term "intelligence officer" is used primarily to refer to a person who obtains information in favor of our state. It can also be called an informer or informer. Whereas a spy is an agent recruited by foreign services. That is why the last word has an exclusively negative connotation and is used in the context of "enemy, traitor." Scouts are always treated with respect, often they are even elevated to the rank of heroes. This is largely due to the exploits of the soldiers of World War II.
Spy Another difference between a scout and a spy is the way they collect information. The latter is engaged in the theft of secret information, obtaining it by dishonest methods. He peeps, eavesdrops, rubs himself into people's trust and pulls the necessary data out of them. Often he infiltrates the camp of the enemy and pretends to be “his own”. Espionage is an illegal activity that carries criminal liability. A scout, on the other hand, can obtain information by both legal and illegal methods. The category of the first includes the collection of data from open sources, listening to foreign radio channels, the use of special satellites. Illegal operations fall under the concept of "espionage".
When obtaining secret information on the territory of a foreign state, the intelligence officer must wear the uniform of his armed forces. If an agent is captured by the enemy side, he will have the status of a prisoner of war. Whereas in the absence of a form, a person is automatically classified as a spy. That is, from the point of view of international law, only military personnel wearing the clothes of their armed forces are considered intelligence officers. All other individuals who obtain secret information in secret ways are, by definition, spies. They may be prosecuted.
To summarize, what is the difference between a scout and a spy.
| Scout | Spy |
| Collects information about the enemy in favor of our state | Engaged in the theft of secret information under the guidance of foreign intelligence agencies |
| Has a positive reputation | The word is used exclusively in a negative context. |
| Synonyms - informer, informer | Synonyms - enemy, traitor |
| Can extract data by both legal and illegal methods | Collects information in a dishonest way |
| Wears the uniform of his armed forces and acts only on their side | Can infiltrate the camp of the enemy and impersonate "his own" |
| In case of capture by the enemy, he receives the status of a prisoner of war | When exposed, bears criminal responsibility |
Answer from °*”*° VeDA °*”*° [guru]
A spy is a person who secretly collects information about one of the conflicting parties in favor of the other party. Close in meaning to the word "scout", but differs from it in some features of use and a general negative connotation. In international law, the status of a spy and intelligence agent differs significantly.
In accordance with the rules of international humanitarian law, any person from the armed forces party to the conflict who falls into the hands of an opposing party while engaged in espionage is not entitled to prisoner of war status and may be treated as a spy, i.e. subject to criminal prosecution.
Unlike a spy, an intelligence officer, i.e. a member of the armed forces of a party to the conflict who, on behalf of that party, collects or attempts to collect information in territory controlled by an adverse party, is not considered a person engaged in espionage if, in doing so, it wears the uniform of its armed forces. Thus, in the event of capture, the scout has the right to the status of a prisoner of war.
Accordingly, from the point of view of international law, only front-line scouts wearing the uniform of their armed forces can be considered scouts. All undercover intelligence officers are, by definition, spies.
Answer from Viktor Kornev[guru]
Both words mean the same thing, but the scout is a hero, which means OURS, and the spy is an enemy (THIS) ---)))
Answer from Igornik[guru]
you answered exactly! Foreigners are nasty, bastards are spies, and ours are heroic scouts!
Answer from Mainka[active]
we call a scout our own chela, who scouts something about others (foreigners) ... and the spy is the opposite: a stranger and learns something "about us." Therefore, the perception of these words is opposite!
Answer from UNKNOWN[guru]
A spy wants to steal information from you, but a scout
For you. According to the principle of "one's own - someone else's". Children's explainer.))) And as for the American understanding, the translation is a thin thing. We have many words, terms and concepts that do not coincide.
Answer from Alekx CU[guru]
We are spies on us
there is nothing complicated.
Answer from Lusa diatchenko[guru]
for their -
scout
for the enemy
spy
today
leads -
the one who got out
Answer from Aahzam Imamulla[newbie]
I became interested in the reasoning of "VIRGO" - "... only front-line scouts wearing the uniform of their armed forces can be considered scouts."
I want to ask you a question as a veteran of the Armed Forces who served in the special forces group of the Northern Fleet. Let's say I got to the beach of a potential enemy with a goal ... well, it doesn't matter. In some shorts, oh, that is, in swimming trunks! I find out. And then - bam, I was grabbed by enemy counterintelligence, bastards. Well, it’s clear with that hare, which, if you determine by the ears, then he is 300 years old. And what about me - they will determine me by uniforms - that is, by my underpants, oh, again, BY SHOTS or by a DISCUSSION now?
