The US intelligence services have called into question the work of an academic quoted in today’s Sun smear on Jeremy Corbyn, Scrapbook can reveal.
Professor Anthony Glees of Buckingham University is quoted as a “Cold War expert” by the paper in its story about the Labour leader’s meeting with a Czech diplomat in 1986.
But Glees has a checkered record when it comes to supposed links between Labour politicians and communist spies.
In 2003, he released a book called “The Stasi Files: East Germany’s Operations Against Britain.”
Glees claimed that the late Lord Roper, a Labour MP who defected to the SDP, had been an “agent of influence” of the Stasi.
The Times cancelled plans to serialise the book because of the defamatory claim and later said Roper had been “wrongly” accused:
In its obituary to Roper, the Guardian noted Glees’ charge was “rejected by fellow cold-war historians, by John himself and, by implication, the Foreign Office.”
It pointed out: “In 2005 John was made a Privy Counsellor. As one observer put it, they do not appoint collaborators with spies to the Privy Council.”
The episode led to Glees’ book being given an unfavourable review by the CIA.
Hayden Peake, the curator of the CIA’s “historical intelligence collection”, said parts of the book are “unintelligible” and evidence to support some of his claims was missing.
“This is not an easy book to read and understand. It is awkwardly organized and its analysis is steadfastly mediocre. There is doubt that the conclusions are supported by the evidence and no way to check.
“Despite the inclusion of a glossary, some HVA terms are not defined correctly; e.g. , IMs are called Informelle Mitarbeiter ; whereas Inoffizelle Mitarbeiter is correct–Mike Dennis gets it right. Furthermore, the story is not “told with comprehensive footnotes” as claimed.
“Many paragraphs have none where they are badly needed. That even Glees is unsure about his exegesis is suggested in the conclusions when he asks: “Were the Stasi’sBritish sources spies?”
It all seems a bit more Austin Powers than John le Carré…