Talk:Vladimir Vetrov

message: I thought Vetrov was GRU? nobs 19:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Both "Storm Birds" and "Mitrokhin Archive" have him as KGB (FCD). I'll keep an eye out, though. Noel (talk) 05:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Organization?

message: Cherkashin states in Spyhandler  on p 254 that Vetrov was executed in 1984. In the same sentence he alludes to Bearden and Rise The Main Enemy: The Inside Story of the CIA's Final Showdown with the KGB. I've not read Bearden's work, so I'm not sure what the source of the date was in that book.--Rank01 01:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the well-researched book Bonjour Farewell by Sergeï Kostine, Vetrov was executed in early 1985. He was in jail since early 1982 after attempting to kill his mistress, an action during which he killed a policeman. Obviously the French had missed all information about arrestation of Vetrov for murder and believed he had been discovered. They began to use Vetrov material, probably leading the Soviets to understand they had a mole among them. It was only late 83 or early 84 that Soviets charged Vetrov for treason. His wife visited him several times until late 1984. She received a paper saying her husband had been executed early 1985. :The exact way Vetrov was identified as the mole is unknown, but the most probable is related to the expellation of 47 Soviets "diplomats" by France mid-83 as retaliation after it was discovered that French embassy "Myosotis" communications systems had been bugged by KGB. The Soviet Ambassador came to protest to the President, which replied by showing a copy of a Farewell material (some said it identified many Soviets as spies, other says it was non-directly related and it was just showing that French knew very much about KGB activities). It probably helped Soviet CI to understand they had a mole, and to limit the suspects to the some who had access to such a highly-classified document. Many other possible sources can be imagined. Bearden and Risen think it was the fourth 1985 mole in the CIA (also thought to be responsible for the losses of Oleg Gordievsky, Sergei Bokhan and Leonid Polishtchuk) after Edward Lee Howard, Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen, but I found strange that a US mole may be responsible for leaking officers from so different posts (Gordievsky was in UK, Bokhan in Greece, Polishtchuk in Nigeria, and Vetrov was then in KGB HQ in Moscow and working for the French). It may also be possible that a French case officer had sent a message related to Farewell through the bugged Myosotis, that the French businessman met Farewell's wife in 1982 or 83 trying to get more informatio about Farewell's fate... Vitaly Yurchenko said that Vetrov had send carelessly letters to his wife, but hard to believe from a experienced case officer. Rob1bureau (talk) 17:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of execution

message: This is gonna be an interesting article.  Next year is 20 yesrs since Chernobyl, and there will be further declassification of documents.  I'd like to work on it, but when I started the Venona project, I thought it would take 2 or 3 months; now it looks more like 2 or 3 years (minimum). nobs 17:12, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me restate the question: "What is GRU Line X?"; I beleive "technical line", but it may also be refered to as "scientific technical".  Also one must pay attention to the date of sourcing and the context of the timeframe it references etc. nobs 16:57, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is "[[Line X]]"? 

message: Not that I really care, but the difference between the French and English versions of this article is amusing. As if the role of France was deliberately minimized here (and maybe too emphasized in the French version). Let me give a couple of examples.
Here it says throughout the article that Vetrov decided to release information to "France and NATO" or "the West" whereas in the French version of the article, only France (and its secret services) are mentioned. In fact, it says in the French version that president François Mitterrand personally informed president Ronald Reagan of the existence of this double agent (at the 1981 G7 Ottawa summit). It also says that Reagan said this was "the greatest spy story of the 20th century" (bit of a pity not to include this quote here, isn't it?).
On the other hand, for instance (but this seems more anecdotal to me), the French article only mentions the 47 soviet spies expelled from France, and not the whole 150 soviet spied expelled from western countries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seub (talk • contribs) 16:15, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  France's credit 

message: I recommend that these two articles (Vladimir Vetrov and Farewell Dossier) be merged, as they are inextricably linked and there is much common material and the sources are largely the same. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 22:11, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger recommendation 

message: According to a TV documentary, Vetrov held the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.50.174.248 (talk) 18:20, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rank 

message: "One report states that information provided by Vetrov "neutralized 422 KGB officers and 54 Western agents (Soviet moles) working for the KGB and the USSR bloc"."[7]
Which report was that? Kostin's book?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Was Kisevalter Nash? (talk • contribs) 03:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Report 

message: Rhetorical question: If Vetrov was truly spying for France and NATO, why did he (and Kochnov, Loginov, and Yurchenko, et al., ad nauseam) claim Yuri Nosenko was a true defector? (Suggested reading: Tennent H. "Pete" Bagley's 2007 Yale University Press book, "Spy Wars." It's free-to-read online.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Was Kisevalter Nash? (talk • contribs) 06:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imho, Vetrov Was a KGB Provocation