Jane DOE: The following podcast was released in 2021 on a separate platform. IC leadership, thought leadership, titles, current events, and technology may have changed and evolved since its original release.

The opinions and views expressed in the following podcast do not represent the views of NIU or any other U.S. government entity. They are solely the opinions and views of the speakers. Any mention of organizations, publications, or products not owned or operated by the U.S. Government is not a statement of support and does not constitute U.S. Government endorsement.

Welcome back to the Intelligence Jumpstart podcast. I am your host, Jane DOE. For this episode, I had the opportunity to speak with NIU Research Fellow, Amy Sturm, who recently sat down with Colonel (ret.) Chris Costa. Chris is the Executive Director of the International Spy Museum and a 34-year veteran of the Department of Defense. Previously, he served 25 years in the United States Army working in Counterintelligence, Human Intelligence, and with Special Operations Forces in Central America, Europe, and throughout the Middle East. He ran a wide range of intelligence and special operations in Panama, Bosnia, the first and second Iraq wars, in addition to Afghanistan. Chris earned two Bronze Stars for sensitive Human Intelligence work; he was assigned to the Naval Special Warfare Development Group as the first civilian squadron Deputy Director. In 2013, Chris was inducted into the United States Special Operations Commando Hall of Honor for lifetime service to U.S. Special Operations. Most recently, he served as a special assistant to the President and Senior Director for Counterterrorism at the National Security Council.

Jane DOE: Hi, Amy, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with me today.

Amy S.: Thank you so much for having me, this has been so much fun.

Jane DOE: It really did sound like a lot of fun. And I don't want you to give anything away. But I'm hoping you can speak to any takeaways you immediately had. I felt like there was a lot there. And I'd love to hear your perspective … once you left the conversation.

Amy S.: There were a few things. One, I've known Chris for a number of years. And he's one of the nicest spies in Washington. And so, it's very fitting that he's Executive Director of the museum now. And his passion for the museum absolutely shows forth. And I've been privileged to go to the museum with him. And he, he really does love it as much as he says, and so it's validation that those of us in the Community are at our heart. You know, we're deeply proud of the work that we do. And we're also nerds and fans of the work that one another has contributed over the course of national security careers, even those that came generations before.

Jane DOE: I love that. And I love the fact that we can still learn things, even though, some of us have been in the Community for a while and doing this job every day. What else did you learn? What else can you share with your listeners without giving too much away?

Amy S.: Yeah, I think one of the things I learned over the course of discussion with Chris is for many years, I've been frustrated. And I think a lot of intelligence professionals are frustrated with the way we can often be portrayed in media. And the way Chris frames it throughout the interview is a starting point for a conversation about what is true, what is false, what's exaggerated. And I think thinking about media and Hollywood, and the sort of sensationalization of, of tradecraft and spy craft, is a starting point for a conversation. And for a long time, the Intelligence Community didn't speak about what we did in many cases, we still can't.

But when we can tell our stories and how we tell our stories, I think is really powerful. And I think that's something and NIU is involved in and at the forefront of - and I think it's something the Spy Museum is involved in at the forefront of. And in a democracy, as soon as it's safe to tell those stories, I think it's important we have those conversations with the public.

Jane DOE: Absolutely. And I want to thank you for speaking and having that conversation with Chris and telling those stories that he has available to the public at the International Spy Museum. And, you know, as we move forward and keep these conversations going, I look forward to working with you in the future and hearing more about the stories that you're able to tell. Thank you so much, Amy, I appreciate your time. And I'm so excited to share your conversation with Chris.

Amy S.: Thank you so much. It's been a joy.

Amy S.: Chris, thank you so much for joining us.

Chris Costa: Well, thank you for having me. Amy. It's great to see you.

Amy S.: Your career has taken an interesting turn. I think you may be the first former National Security Council official to wind up as a museum director. And the International Spy Museum is the most interesting museum in Washington DC in many ways. So, can you tell us a little bit about how that journey happened for you?

Chris Costa: Yeah, I'd be happy to Amy. So, quite candidly, at the White House, as you well know, I worked long days and long evenings … and really I didn't expect everyone to work the kind of hours that I was working, but I knew it was my last opportunity to serve the government - at least I thought so at the time.

So, I only had Sundays off and on Sundays, I used to walk to the Spy Museum on F Street before we moved to L'Enfant Plaza, and I would go there, and it was a bit of a touchstone. I was nostalgia for, you know, doing intelligence work … or nostalgic, I should say, for doing intelligence work. And I'd buy a book. That was how I treated myself. My wife and I would walk down there, once a week on a Sunday. I'd buy a book. I'd go into the retail store. And for me, I did that one thing I wanted to do each week besides work.

And then I recognized that the Spy Museum was moving to L'Enfant Plaza across the mall, so not too far from F Street. And I went over and saw the building and one day. I turned to my wife and said, how when I leave government, could I possibly blend my passion for this business with education? How could I get this job, a job, at the Spy Museum? And serendipitously, when I decided to leave the NSC with zero plan for what I was going to do, I was invited to submit my resume, and take a couple of interviews at the Spy Museum. And much to my pleasant surprise, I was offered a job. So that's how I ended up at the Spy Museum. But it was to blend education with my passion.

Amy S.: That's an incredible story. And it also has a little bit of a Hollywood ring to it. In the visiting on Sundays, the picking up of a book and as fate would have it, that's where you wound up. Which leads us into the connections between the Spy Museum, tradecraft, and Hollywood. You spent the vast majority of your career like my daughter would say, as a spy, doing human intelligence and doing operations on behalf of the U.S. government. The International Spy Museum tells a story about spies, and spycraft, and intelligence tradecraft. To what extent does the museum tell a story that's real versus a story for Hollywood?

Chris Costa: So that's an excellent, excellent question. And I would start by saying most people haven't lived the life of a spy, as your daughter would say, right? For the majority of people, fiction fills the gaps. And I candidly, I am a nonfiction reader of intelligence literature. I have a huge library that I put together painstakingly for decades, and I love nonfiction. There's nothing in those books that I haven't somehow in some way, seen, touched, or been exposed to. So, there's a lot of learning that happens with intelligence literature. Hollywood is a little bit different because it exposes the world to a view of intelligence. In some cases, there's an exaggeration, but it does allow you to step into the shoes of a spy. The museum absolutely tells factual stories. It's they're told responsibly; we're not tied to the Intelligence Community.

So, some people don't like the stories we tell because there are cause célèbre, there are colossal failures in the Intelligence Community. I'm talking about the international intelligence community. But what we can do at the International Spy Museum is factually tell stories. So, it's about the stories and it's reinforced and underscored by some 7000 artifacts that we have. So, we have the opportunity to give the international public a sense of what it is to spy.

Hollywood, of course, allows us to watch the Hollywood version of espionage. But I think it's really important to note that Hollywood does, in fact, shape our opinions and expectations. And pop fiction doesn't just influence, you know, these ideas. We have a whole exhibit dedicated to pop culture in spying, we call it License to Thrill. So, we actually tease out, you know, movie snippets and talk as a real intelligence officer. I talk about one movie in particular and other intelligence officers talk about the important gems that you can latch on to. So, a lot of learning happens with Hollywood.

But of course, for me, it is absolutely maddening to go to, you know, a theater and watch a spy movie with my wife sitting next to me, because I’m always demanding an honest appraisal of the business. But Hollywood is going to sensationalize pieces because as you well know, you know not all of what we do is action-oriented in many cases. It's very tedious. It's very boring. It's laborious. It's painstaking. Have you ever seen James Bond, do his planning for his surveillance detection route? No. And I've never seen him even do surveillance detection. So inexplicably, he doesn't do any of those tasks. Because I don't think in two hours, or so, people are going to get a deep sense of the business. But they want to immerse themselves into, you know, the idea of being a spy. So, in some cases, they just want to suspend reality for a bit.

Amy S.: It would probably be much less entertaining story if Jack Bauer had to ask for permission for his human intelligence operations before he did them every time. Right? That's an excellent segue into talking about some of the real-life exhibits on the business of intelligence that you have at the Spy Museum. Some of which are stranger than fiction. After your distinguished career, are there any that still surprised you? Are there things in the museum that you go visit and look at again and again?

Chris Costa: You know, again, since my brain is very nonfiction oriented – right? I just love looking at assassinations. As McCobb as that might sound, we have tools of assassination that have been used. And it contextualizes what is happening currently - either Iranians that are dispatched across the globe to potentially kidnap dissidents - to what happened throughout the Cold War, when Russia conducted poisonings of dissidents on a bridge. On a bridge in London, the Waterloo Bridge, where a Bulgarian dissident felt, you know, a slight jab in his right calf. And next thing you know, he died, suffered tremendously from ricin poisoning.

So, we have these artifacts, from history, that really contextualize some of these stories. The poisonings that are breaking out across the world as a result of intelligence services playing an old trade. So, I love to walk through the museum. I'm doing a talk on folks who are going to be talking to me about Robert Hanson. I don't know that story deeply. But tomorrow, I walk into our exhibit on spies from history. And I will look at some amazing artifacts that were used by the FBI trader, Robert Hanson. So, these stories bring to life intelligence history. And that's just a snippet.

So, I find the museum a touchstone for really contextualizing the business that we're in. And it's really important to see the fact versus fiction. And, again, we have License to Thrill, where you can sit down for 30 minutes and watch an excellent film where intelligence officers kind of talk through movies - what's real and what's not. And I think that's a lot of fun for the public. So, you can't just go to the Spy Museum, as your family well knows, for a couple of hours, right? You got to go back. And you've got to decide if you're going to watch all the films, if you're going to see all the artifacts, or if you're going to read all the labels. It, you know, takes a lot of time to really, really appreciate the depth of learning you can do at the museum.

Amy S.: It was truly amazing. When my family had the opportunity to go ... at around every corner, even for experienced intelligence professionals, we discovered something new. And that was certainly one of the joys of the museum and one of unique things about being in Washington DC, that we can see all of that just right down the street from where we live in work. What is your favorite true-life story on intelligence in the museum? And what's your favorite true-life story on intelligence and spy tradecraft, and why?

Chris Costa: Well, I tell a story, and I don't want to spoil it, a personal story of conducting operations. Not certainly giving away any secrets. It's very tactical, and it played out in Afghanistan. So, what an opportunity, I had to tell a non-sensitive story about the work of being an intelligence handler of dealing with an intelligence walk-in, in a war zone in Afghanistan. So, I have the opportunity to tell a story. I can't say that's my favorite story. Because I'm in it, right? That would be self-aggrandizing. But I do enjoy the opportunity of sitting in the real spies, real story galleries, and listening to my former colleagues share their stories. And then you step out of that gallery. And right there.

So, one of my favorite stories to your question more directly is the story of the Canadian caper, Argo - which was a mixture of Hollywood and a CIA operation. And by the way, the CIA made an excellent decision years ago, to allow Tony Mendez to tell that story. I believe the director was George Tenet, but the CIA director, or whoever it was said, you know, this story has to be told to the public. And it is told and we tell that story with artifacts in Tony's own words. I think he actually shares part of that story in real spies’ real stories - kind of what it's like to see in the big screen, Ben Affleck playing, you know, the real-life Tony Mendez - who went to Iran, on an operation to try to get Americans back in, out of the Canadian Embassy, back to the United States, using forged documents. Intelligence, backstopping meaning when the Iranians picked up the phone and said, is this guy really putting on this hokey movie, here in Iran? And the answer was, yes, because there was backstopping in Hollywood. So, it's a twist. It's kind of the joke. It was on the Iranians at the time because the United States was able to get these Americans out of Iran.

And Tony Mendez tells that story, and we share some of those artifacts with the public. So, the Canadian Caper is a great story, and I really enjoy that. And there's some little artifacts that I'm able to talk about. Pocket litter, for example, we have some pocket litter in quotes that was used during that operation. So, you then have the opportunity to define what that means. And then the public gets a sense, without, again, giving away any secrets of what the real work of intelligence is all about overseas – operationally, of course. We tell analytical stories, as well, which should, should not be put aside. They're very important. And they're very central to the intelligence communities, globally. And very important part of the story. Intelligence doesn't exist for itself. So, we have analysts in their own words, telling their stories. So, it's not just about operations. It's also the analytical tradecraft.

Amy S.: It really is a very multifaceted museum and incredibly interactive. I think it tells the experience well. I had the privilege to see Mr. Mendez and his wife, when I came into the intel community, myself, they came to one of my early training courses. This is unfortunately before he passed away. And one of the beauties of the Spy Museum is you've captured his story, but also his wife's - who was a very senior CIA official involved in science and technology, and the tradecraft of disguise and deception. And so, you've captured these stories in such a unique and lasting way. You can tell them over and over again, for generations, it's really quite a treasure.

Chris Costa: That's right. Jonna Mendez, in her own rights was a terrific operator. She was chief of disguise, and she famously tells us the story of wearing a disguise in the Oval Office. I've been in the oval office a few times in my career, and I certainly didn't have the courage to, to, to reinforce a story with props. In this case, it was a bit of a conspiracy with Judge Webster, who was the director of the CIA - walking Jonna into the Oval Office wearing a disguise and then briefing President HW Bush on how we were defeating Russian counterintelligence or Soviet counterintelligence at the time.

And then Jonna famously began to peel off her disguise - her face, as it were. And we have a photograph of that disguise in a picture of Jonna sitting in the White House in the Oval Office - telling that story. That’s certainly a lot of fun. And Jonna is out there. She's publishing lots of books, and she's telling her story. And I'm proud to say she's on our advisory board. So, I get her candid feedback on our stories. So that just gives you a flavor for some of the things we do at the museum.

Amy S: Well, I personally love that you partner with practitioners and analysts and those that have experience in the field so that they get to tell their stories once it's safe to do so. It really is a unique kind of partnership. Speaking to those kinds of partnerships, are there any future projects and exhibits coming up that you'd like to share?

Chris Costa: Yeah, no, I really appreciate that question. So, we have free public programming. So, every month, every month, I do a program called Virtual Spy Chat, where I bring in a luminary, a real luminary, from the community to talk and kind of unpack current events. And it's proving to be really popular. So, on August 19, I had Mark Polymeropolous, who is in the news a lot because he's been a victim of the Havana Syndrome, some kind of, you know, electronic or microwave attack that's caused horrific headaches, etc., etc. The scientific community has not, has not, determined the origin of these attacks. Although I have my suspicions. But we do that each month. But another example of a program is our curator Dr. Andrew Hammond. He does an outstanding job of also bringing in guests through a historical lens. In this case, he's bringing in the author of a new book called Ethel Rosenberg an American tragedy. And this is where the curator will sit down with the author, and they will unpack this current book - and I'm really looking forward to hearing the other side of the Ethel Rosenberg story, or maybe learning a lot of what I don't know about the story. Everything about political paranoia in the 50s to anti-Semitism. So, the author and Dr. Hammond, Andrew, will discuss this.

Manolis Priniotakis: I’m Manolis Priniotakis, NIU’s Vice President for Research & Infrastructure and this is this episode’s Manolis Minute.

The next episode features NIU’s own Dr. Debora Pfaff and Dr. Bo Miller on the IC’s relationship with the public. Of course, public interest in intelligence has long been apparent, and some of the secrecy surrounding CIA, in particular, began to break down in the 1960s and 1970s due to several factors, to include Congressional hearings into intelligence activities. But also, the first wave of retirements and agency departures after its founding in 1947.

Probably most notorious was ex-CIA employee Philip Agee, whose 1975 book, Inside the Company, made several unauthorized revelations. In particular of the names of intelligence officers and operational techniques. He eventually sought refuge in Grenada under leftist leader Stanley Bishop and then fled after the U.S. intervention in 1983 to Cuba, where he eventually died in 2008.
Perhaps more notable, however … and I think more interesting … was the work of Miles Copeland, an OSS officer from WWII who transitioned to CIA and then was one of its key officers in the post-war middle east, alongside such notable figures as cousins Archie and Kermit Roosevelt, both scions of that illustrious family.

Copeland’s 1969 book Game of Nations, which I believe did go through prepublication review, holds up an interesting tale of the early days of CIA’s activities and of the international scene at the time.
His historical legacy is as fascinating as it is complicated. But one thing is for certain, his son Stewart has had an indelible impact on popular music as the drummer for the Police … combining middle eastern beats with reggae rhythms. His other son Miles III had a similar influence on music behind the scenes, both as the manager of the Police, but also the discoverer of multiple acts over more than four decades ... to include the Go-Gos, the Dead Kennedys, and the Bangles.

Thanks again for listening to Intelligence Jumpstart. For more information on NIU, please visit our website, www.ni-u.edu.

Amy S.: That leads me to another question about sort of the theme of our discussion in terms of intelligence being sometimes stranger than fiction. And yet, Hollywood still needs to fictionalize and sensationalize some of the aspects of intelligence tradecraft. Many of the individuals we've discussed, Tony Mendez and others are already characters in and of themselves. Right? And I'm sure you worked with characters in your time in government. Why do you think Hollywood needs to sensationalize tradecraft and spy craft and character development? And what impact do you think that has on the IC and on actual practitioners?

Chris Costa: Yeah, I think sets an expectation for the work, you know, the work being, action, every second of a film. And nonfiction are filled with these bigger-than-life stories. And that's just not the case. As you and I have alluded to, the business can be, you know, very routine. But I would say, what it does, what Hollywood does for us, it starts the dialogue. What a great opportunity. We have the opportunity to sit down, watch a film, and then kind of unpack with our families if they're interested. In some cases, you know, they're not, you know, they have better things to do than listen to me bloviate and tell stories about, you know why I don't like a movie. But in many cases, they say hey Dad is that real, and I can just kind of nibble around the edges.

So, Hollywood gives us the opportunity to start a discussion. And my favorite example, consider the idea of James Bond versus a Jason Bourne. You can use those characters. Most people can identify with a James Bond. So, you can say, hey, you know, the cocktail circuit that is reminiscent of a James Bond. Right? You wear a tuxedo. You go to a cocktail party. You're trying to spot-assess somebody you want to recruit, well, James Bond gets a little more, you know, Hollywood when he's doing that. But certainly, that gives us a framing of perhaps an intelligence officer, you know, swimming in a sea of diplomats looking for his target for approaching at a cocktail party. Right?

And then when you talk about Jason Bourne, then it's far more action-oriented. And that might be reminiscent of warzone intelligence, where you might have adrenaline pumping through your body, you know, significantly because you're in a war zone. And in some cases, you might be receiving fire. So that's a starting point. It's a launching point, a point of departure, to have these discussions to educate the public.

But I do think that it sets up in some cases, a false expectation. And just use, for example, we talked about Argo. I'm not going to spoil the ending of the movie, but Tony Mendez even talks about the ending not being entirely real. It was Hollywood-ized or sensationalized a little bit. Or the movie breach another example. I'm going to actually watch that film tonight because I'm going to be talking about Hanson. And there's a spot in that movie, which is completely sensationalized. Why? Again, I won't spoil it, but an FBI agent has to have a gun, and he has to do something with that gun. And the story in Breach was completely sensationalized. That brief in yet because there's an expectation from the public that they're going to see some action. Otherwise, the movie does a great job of telling the Hanson story, and it's important for the public to see it.

But yeah, Hollywood's always gonna sensationalize these stories. But for me, I view it as an opportunity versus a threat, right? The opportunity, it allows us, you know, NIU, or the Spy Museum, or college professors to go into the classroom and use that as a starting point to say, hey, I did that. I did something like that on a battlefield or in some capital in some anonymous city - somewhere in the world. But if you sit down … another example is the show Americans that I binged on. I love the show. Donna, my wife, and I have, have binged on that show. But at the same time, you know, it's maddening because one episode is maybe two times more exciting than my whole career because that's what the public demands. But you have an opportunity to see real spy gadgetry real tradecraft. So, you just have to be, you know, open your eyes wide enough to realize that yeah, there's a lot of fiction in those shows, but there's all saw a lot of learning that can happen.

Amy S.: Chris, your comments remind me of one of my favorite scenes in the movie, Imitation Game, where they're talking about intelligence gains and losses. Right? When they're looking at the submarine patterns, and they're decrypting them. And they realize they can't do anything about the attack, that's going to happen. Right? Because it would reveal the tradecraft. And it's a very tiny moment in the movie. But for intelligence professionals, it's a very real and lived experience of keeping those secrets and that information quiet in the interest of national security, but it's not actually heavily dramatized. But in those quiet moments, it sounds like what you're describing in some movies is a little closer to truth. The ending may be exaggerated, but the lead-up to the ending, especially in Argo and others, is maybe a little truer to reality.

Chris Costa: That's exactly right. Now you said it, you know, articulated it better than I did. There's always learning that can be garnered from these films and nonfiction books. It's just a matter of teasing that out. Showing the right scene or going to YouTube and finding that one dramatic moment and then unwinding it a bit - discussing what's real, and what is absolute fiction. So, I think those vignettes are really important. And they have to be considered along with, with other sources. And it's all we have, as I said, we don't have real video in most cases. Although there is some video unclassified that I had access to something that I did, and that's powerful. And when you compare that particular video to reality, you see that you know, life does imitate art, or, you know, the reverse applies.

Amy S.: Chris, are you telling me that there's no video of you in a tuxedo drinking a martini shaken, not stirred?

Chris Costa: No, I'm afraid that's part of one of my stories. Right? I've never done anything operational in a tuxedo. But I like to say that, whereas my predecessor at the International Spy Museum, Peter Earnest, who, you know, is legend, in his own right. Peter does tell about a James Bond moment, at a diplomatic reception in some capital somewhere in the world, where he had his moment wearing a tuxedo and doing something operational at a cocktail party. And when he was able to break away from the herd. I don't think we tell that story anymore. But I like to use that as a departure point for saying, but I've never done anything operational in a tuxedo. But our version, in a warzone of a cocktail party, might be going to villages, repetitively. Looking to spot and identify potential sources. So, you might not go to a cocktail party, but the version in the hinterlands of Afghanistan might be sitting cross-legged, with tribal chiefs and local warlords. In fact, that's exactly the case. That's how you meet some of your would-be sources. So, the rural cocktail party I like to talk about, so you can make the comparison. You know, that might be more Jason Bourne than it is James Bond, but there is a Warzone version. So yeah, never wore a tuxedo. I'm sorry to disappoint. I certainly am disappointed. I wish I could tell a story about doing something operational in a tuxedo but no such luck.

Amy S.: So, let's dig in a little bit. In terms of things that are sensationalized in Hollywood and the truth behind them. Right? I want to run through a couple of topics. You mentioned time in war zones and meeting with warlords. But I think there are other categories in the intelligence business we should talk about during our discussion, and one is cyber warfare. In movies, in TV, and film, characters seem to be able to hit a button and steal secrets from another country or shut down a network immediately. Is technology really that advanced? Or is Hollywood setting us up for disappointment in this new age of cyber warfare?

Chris Costa: So, what a great question because it allows me to again … and this wasn't planned. Right? We didn't … I didn't know the questions until I received them a couple days ago. And what a great opportunity to talk about cyber because we do exactly that. In one of our interactives for the public, we have a gallery, where sitting in a theater are hackers and people that are experts on cyber - show a brief vignette of a Hollywood film, and then the public gets to vote on whether they think that's real or not. And they either get that right or they get it wrong. But then the hackers sitting in a movie theater says no, we can't do that. That's completely Hollywood. So, we have an opportunity to set the expectations or correct the expectations with an interactive. So, another opportunity that we have, and we do that specifically with cyber.

Amy S.: Do the visitors of the museum get instant feedback on whether or not they were correct?

Chris Costa: They do. From a theater of hackers sitting in what looks like a theater. You know repetitively playing, over and over, all day long. They get a chance to hear, hey, you were wrong, you know, we can't do that that's completely fictionalized. And there's, there's no way that the Intelligence Community has that capability as far as they know. So, I think it's, it's just a great vehicle, using films in Hollywood to teach. It underscores what we've been speaking about. So, you have to see our cyber gallery to appreciate that and experience that interactive,

Amy S.: Their feedback is probably more immediate than those of us in the business. And what a counter-argument to the Hollywood perception of spy craft. To the perception that you could even be wrong. Right? How often is Jack Bower wrong? So, what an interesting insight from museum guests. If Hollywood treads that line between starting a conversation, but also at the same time setting unrealistic expectations. How does the IC, or how should the IC, and you were an IC professional for many, many years, build trust with the public? Because often the IC doesn't speak as loudly or as vociferously as Hollywood does. The IC is often very reluctant to talk about itself. And for good reason. The mission is based in secrecy. So how does the IC build that trust, given the perceptions that are out there about the Intelligence Community and tradecraft?

Chris Costa: So, I think the Intelligence Community has an opportunity. NIU has an incredible opportunity. We, we are a democracy here in the United States. And it's really important that the Intelligence Community finds ways to share what is no longer a need to keep something secret with the public. That in and unto itself builds trust over time. Again, we are a nonprofit, we’re private, we responsibly, with artifacts tell stories that can be told. Stories that are out there in the public domain. But I think that the way to really get at your question is to continue to educate for the intelligence community. To continue to declassify what can be declassified. Other countries, other democratic countries have stricter controls on the release of intelligence information, even the United Kingdom, Australia, or Commonwealth country. I mean, they are more strict than the United States. So, I think it's really interesting that we, as a nation, have figured out ways to declassify and share intelligence with the public or what was classified intelligence with the public.

We have a whole entire exhibit dedicated to revelations in when does a state reveal what was a secret to the public. In the case of Ethel Rosenberg, it wasn't until the 1990s that Venona, you know a Top-Secret program, was released to the public. And that's where the public could get a sense for the intelligence collection that the United States was doing in the 1940s and 50s, against the Soviets. So, in many cases, one could argue that, well, the United States didn't reveal those secrets at an appropriate time. That's a judgment call for decisionmakers. That's a judgment call for the President of the United States and for the Intelligence Community. But over time, it builds a sense of trust that if, after a period of time, information and intelligence can be declassified, that says a lot about a certain state.

The ability to share what was classified with the public, I think, is an important point. But I think it's up to educators at every level. Museums, in the case of the International Spy Museum, and the Intelligence Community, and universities, to continue to educate students on the business of intelligence, the profession. I think it's really important. And do so with a critical lens.

And I guess that's another point. That's the difference between the United States and maybe, maybe private exhibits in the Intelligence Community. The Spy Museum’s role isn't to laud the community, per se. We tell the stories. And in some cases, as I said, we tell stories that people would rather not highlight. Like a colossal failure at the Bay of Pigs. That's famously known, it was a failure of covert action, because it really turned out not to be a covert action because everybody knew, you know, whose fingerprints were all over the operation. It was the United States. And it was much to President Kennedy's dismay at the time. We tell that story. That is a failure of covert action.

We tell the story of Operation Satanique if I said that correctly. I think Satan, the operation, maybe aptly named, where French Special Operations sunk a vessel, in I think Auckland harbor, in New Zealand. The Rainbow Warrior. A ship that was disrupting French nuclear testing. And of course, France wasn't at war with New Zealand, but it decided that they were going to conduct a covert action. It turned out to be a cause célèbre and national embarrassment. Intelligence officers were rolled up, and some of them were lucky not to go to prison for inadvertently killing a crew member of that vessel. So, we tell that story of the Rainbow Warrior and a failed covert action. So, in many cases, we have the benefit also, of telling stories that, you know - and certainly, France isn't thrilled with, I suspect, with us telling one of their covert action failures. But it's important for us to do that.

Amy S.: I think it's important for us to have conversations like today. Talking about what is real and starting that education n process for the public. As part of that, let's talk a little bit about specific movies and television series and our favorite characters. We've named a couple. I've mentioned 24 and Jack Bauer. You've mentioned the Americans, I mentioned Imitation Game. I think you mentioned Argo - although I would have also brought that one up. So, let's leave those aside and talk about some other movies and television characters and what Hollywood gets right and what they get wrong. So, I'll let you pick one, and then I'll ask about some of my favorites.

Chris Costa: Okay, that sounds like fun. So, in anticipation of a question like that, I watched a film called, Topaz. It's a Hitchcock film, and it doesn't appear anywhere in our exhibits. Topaz is about a French intelligence officer that had access to a defector who defected with intelligence during the Cuban Missile Crisis. And at some point, this French intelligence officer at the behest of the CIA, went to the island of Cuba, and he collected intelligence. And it really was an example of life imitating art in some cases.

So, it's a fascinating story. Some of the scenes in the tradecraft were absolutely on the mark. And you don't hear very many people referring to the movie, Topaz, a Hitchcock film - and saying that's my favorite spy film. But it depicts tradecraft, realistically. I saw people unloading a dead drop in a rural location. Those kinds of things play out. So, I love the cat and mouse of a defector of counterintelligence.

And my favorite scene is when the French intelligence officer in New York City is dispatched by the French intelligence officer. The source works at a florist shop, and he is dispatched by the French intelligence officer because he comes from Martinique. So, he's a French citizen, at least in this time period in history. And he's dispatched into a hotel room, and he's caught red-handed, taking photographs of documents. I won't spoil the rest of the scene. But it's a fascinating dynamic because any human intelligence officer lives vicariously in fear for an intelligence source that they train getting caught red-handed. Or you getting caught red-handed, yourself, when you have some incriminating something on your person.

So, I love the movie, Topaz. And I really encourage your listeners to, you know, find it on Netflix, or some something and, and watch it. And just one final point, if I could. The name resonated with me, Topaz, because there was a source at NATO that selected his own name, Topaz, in ode to the movie and in ode to this idea that he was an intelligence gem. So, he selected his own code name, a source that had penetrated NATO, when I was working there in the early 1990s. Eventually this source, his last name was, Rupp, was uncovered. Topaz was uncovered. And I was part, tangentially, of the investigation. But I made the tie to the Hitchcock movie in the fact that he decided that he would consider himself an intelligence gem. And he selected his very own code name based on what he thought he could deliver to the East Germans. So, a fascinating story in and unto its own right.

Amy S.: Wow. So, a case of true-life imitating art. Are there any movies or television shows or Hollywood depictions of the intelligence business and tradecraft that you dislike? And why?

Chris Costa: Hmm, that's a tougher question for me. I think it's just the idea. We'll talk about the show The Americans. We have a former spy for the Soviet Union or the Russians. I think both of my might have crossed over. Jack Barsky was a deep cover nonofficial cover officer that was eventually rolled up by the FBI. So, he could have been your neighbor. Jack Barsky talks about the Americans, and he underscores some of the points I've made. The idea of people, very liberally applying disguises and using them operationally all the time in the show The Americans. You know, that's absurd from an intelligence standpoint, because you're taking tremendous risks when you're wearing disguises. Having been trained in the use of disguise, those kinds of tools have to be used absolutely judiciously, as Jonna Mendez would point out. So, in the Americans, the idea of wearing disguises so frequently was problematic for me, but I could overlook that based on, you know, some of the other tradecraft that you get to see in the Americans.

Amy S.: Are there any distorted images or videos that you wish Hollywood would leave behind, and right things that you wish could be corrected? Or that maybe weren't part of the milieu you saw about intelligence and spy tradecraft?

Chris Costa: Geez, there are so many that I don't like because they're so sensationalized. But again, you find something of value. I mean, I just love watching, you know, James Bond movies. But I go in with my eyes open. It's not serious, it's sensationalized. I could pick apart different scenes. But at the end of the day, I go there with an expectation, or I go to the film on Netflix and watch it with the idea that this is fictionalized. So, none really strike me, as you know, outrageous.

I will say, generally, if there's a CIA officer, or an FBI agent that is running around the United States, killing people - that really bothers me. So that's kind of my red line. Right? Because I've been a part of the Intelligence Community. I know what intelligence oversight is. I know what history says about abuses in the 1970s. So, when I see the conspiracy stories, and, boy, they're a dime a dozen, right, the Hollywood story of the intelligence officer that's set up by his own headquarters. Those movies make me absolutely bristle. And there are lots of them, I'm not going to call them out specifically. But the idea that CIA headquarters would set up their officers - or the National Security Agency, or Special Operations Command would cut away from their operators deployed - which even some Tom Clancy movies got to if I'm not mistaken, or books. The idea that those things happen are ludicrous.

Although some might argue some of these things played out in history. They make me bristle. Because you and I both come from the Intelligence Community. We know what oversight is. We know what planning an operation means. And God only knows, we have met and sat down with many, many lawyers. Right? So those films with the conspiracies that the United States government would ... would have a conspiracy about one of their officers, I find absurd. So that's kind of my red line for a film or a nonfiction book.

Amy S.: That makes sense. I must ask, and if you haven't, that's okay. Have you seen the series Looming Tower? And I ask, because you spent the end of your career at the National Security Council, and that contains some very interesting perspectives on the lead-up to 911. But also depicts the National Security Council, in which you served, as it existed before 911. I wondered what your reflections were on that.

Chris Costa: So, I have not, but based on your question, I, I think it's incumbent upon me to start watching the Looming Tower. I would like to see it and try to tease out, you know, what's realistic and what's not. And also, again, my family will have the opportunity to maybe sit in a room with me and we'll be able to talk a little bit about it. Again, you know, in a ... in a respectful and responsible way, talk about the film what's real, what's not - or the show. So, I will, I'm going to take that as a challenge for me to ... to dig into the Looming Tower. I will tell you I’ve, I've read Wright's book. I've listened to his book, and it's a powerful story. So, I will, I will dig into that.

Amy S.: And then we can reconnect at some point, comparing it like, Chris, what other movies or television series Do you think get it right? Or at least partially, right?

Chris Costa: For me, this is a softball question, because I specifically answer the question of Hollywood gets getting something exactly right. Now, this all happened before 911 - the story of Black Hawk Down that played out in Mogadishu. And there is a scene in that movie where Hollywood gets it exactly right. And in our license to thrill exhibit - and I don't think I'm spoiling this for our guests, they, I encourage them to see me talk more specifically about the scene - but I'll unwind it a little bit. It is a scene where a vehicle goes into a market. And there's some general officers sitting in a joint operation center, over at Mogadishu airport. I've been to the airport. I know some of the general officers personally, that are sitting in the joint operation center. And they're looking at overhead … I don't know if it came from a helicopter, or what the source was. But it was a Hollywood depiction of a white SUV driving into a marketplace with a source.

That source was to lead them to a warlord. And on the top of the roof was a cross. And this is where I alluded to it earlier. I have literally put a black X, or cross, on the roof of an SUV, with a source, to get access to a target in Afghanistan. For me, even this, though the film took place in, I think, 92 or 93 … not the film, but the story … it became very much an almost routine affair, post 911 of sources getting access to targets on foot, on a bicycle, in a vehicle. And for me, Hollywood absolutely got the nexus of human intelligence right in a targeting story. In this case, it was a warlord in Mogadishu. But these kinds of things played out every day in Afghanistan and in Iraq. So, I thought Hollywood got that aspect of the story exactly right and became a vehicle for me to talk to students about how a source might get access to somebody in a marketplace. So that is one of my favorite scenes.

Amy S.: I want to ask one more time about this idea of education and partnership. National Intelligence University is the Intelligence Community’s university under the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. And the International Spy Museum is a really unique museum in Washington DC in terms of your own independence, and your nonprofit status, and the kinds of stories you tell. How can the university and the museum partner together to improve that trust, truth, and transparency, about the intelligence business, spying, and spy craft?

Chris Costa: That's a superb question. I think the best way is to encourage students to come visit the Spy Museum. Whether it's a group coming over and getting a tour, meeting with me, and contextualizing really their studies, for example. And it's not just NIU it's other schools. The Bush School, new to DC. I think the Bush School sends some of their students over, and I have the opportunity to, to contextualize some of our exhibits, knowing that they're taking courses on national security or on the Cold War. I mean, I would love to bring my students at Georgetown, over to the Spy Museum because we could look at various artifacts on ... from terrorism's history. We have exhibits or a gallery on an uncertain world, which includes terrorism from Oklahoma City, 1972, Munich, to the Palmer Raids in circa 1919, during the red scare.

So, the artifacts the stories bring to life, you know, history. So, I would love to see students, that are in the classroom, be able to break away and come to the museum. And that's a big ask getting students to, to leave the classroom and come to the museum. It's a big ask because decisions have to be made by faculty, but I think it's very rewarding. I've done, for one particular class, I've done three or four meet and greets and walkthroughs of the Spy Museum. And I think it's really, really important. Plus, NIU can consider working with our team of professional educators and figure out where can we partner for programs on various anniversaries. Where we're in consultation all the time with telling stories during a specific anniversary of something that's happened from intelligence history. So, I think there are opportunities. But I really encourage students at NIU and faculty to visit the Spy Museum. It will buttress the classroom, it will reinforce the ... the stories that are told in the curriculum, I think.

Amy S.: I think it's a really fantastic opportunity. And it's wonderful to have you speak to us this morning about Hollywood fact or fiction. I have to ask, is there any other movie or television show that I didn't ask you about this morning that you're dying to talk about?

Chris Costa: No, I feel like I've been debriefed and absolutely exhausted. No, I ... I've been watching films in anticipation of this. And we've really touched on many of the films that I wanted to talk about. Although I want you to know, I went back and watched another film that was a lot of fun. It's called Our Man in Havana … another film that maybe a lot of the public, certainly current generation of young folks haven't watched. It's in black and white. And it is an example of life imitating art.

It's a funny tale of an agent fabricator, which I've been exposed to real fabricators peddling false information, but it happened pre–Cuban missile crisis. And then, when, when the film was released in the missile crisis was, you know, made famous by it breaking out in the news … then folks really thought that Graham Greene had some kind of insight into, into intelligence. And he didn't, it was complete serendipity that life imitated art. And I think it's a fun story. But it's yet again, another example of a humorous tale that smacks of truth for any intelligence officer that's dealt with a source that's fabricating intelligence. And it's really humorous. So, I also encourage listeners to go back and dig out from the archives, Our Man in Havana. Actually, you can find it pretty easily on different providers. So, I really enjoyed that film. And it was all in preparation of, of this talk. So, I thank you for an opportunity to reeducate myself on some classic films.

Amy S.: Chris, this sounds like a great opportunity for our students, faculty, and staff, to go visit some old spy classics and see what is true, from their own experience, and what is fiction. So, thank you so much for an illuminating conversation about the value of having Hollywood depict our community. Their depictions aren't necessarily negative or bad, even if they're inaccurate. I like that you frame them as a starting point for a conversation. I think that was an excellent way of framing it from a real spy expert. Thank you, Chris, both for your time this morning and for your service to our nation. I look forward to having more conversations with you.

Chris Costa: Well, thank you, Amy. Thanks for all your service. Hope we can do something like this again.

Jane DOE: Thank you for listening to the Intelligence Jumpstart podcast. We'd love to hear from you about what you liked and what you'd like to hear more of. If you would like to hear more about a specific topic or issue, send us a note at NIPress@niu.odni.gov. To learn more about NIU visit our website at NI-U.edu.