Peter Sichel, the Jewish James Bond of the Cold War, emerges from the shadows of history to offer a cautionary tale about the consequences of American interventionism. His story, captured in the documentary 'The Last Spy', serves as a stark reminder of the unintended consequences of meddling in foreign affairs, particularly in Iran. Sichel's critique of the CIA's actions in Iran is a call to action for a more thoughtful and nuanced approach to international relations.
Sichel's journey began in Nazi Germany, where he witnessed the horrors of the regime's racial policies. This experience shaped his worldview and fueled his desire to join the US army, where he became a key figure in the CIA's early days. His intelligence and language skills, coupled with his affable manner, made him a valuable asset in extracting information from German prisoners of war. Sichel's belief in the power of information over action, however, often put him at odds with the military's more aggressive strategies.
His rise within the CIA was rapid, and he soon found himself running the agency's operations in Berlin. Sichel's keen understanding of the Soviet Union's intentions and his lobbying for a shift in US focus to the East made him a key player in the Cold War. Yet, his loyalty to the Dulles brothers, particularly Allen, was tested by the fervent anti-communism of John Foster Dulles, the US secretary of state under Eisenhower. This tension highlights the internal conflicts within the CIA, where the line between intelligence gathering and covert action was often blurred.
Sichel's disillusionment with the CIA's actions in Iran is a central theme in 'The Last Spy'. He criticizes the agency's role in the 1953 coup that overthrew Iran's socialist prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh. Sichel argues that this intervention, aimed at protecting British oil interests, had far-reaching consequences. By boosting the authoritarian rule of the shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the CIA inadvertently sowed the seeds of the 1979 Iranian revolution, leading to the rise of the Islamic theocracy. This critique is particularly striking given the CIA's admission in 2023 that its intervention in Iran was 'undemocratic'.
What makes Sichel's perspective unique is his ability to trace the long-term implications of the CIA's actions. He argues that the agency's reckless nature and its tendency to view nationalist leaders as Soviet puppets led to a cycle of violence and instability. Sichel's involvement in covert operations, such as the use of a female agent to retrieve a stool sample from Sukarno, underscores the absurdity and inefficiency of some of these missions. His retirement from the CIA in 1960 and his focus on his family's wine business marked a turning point, allowing him to reflect on his career with a sense of detachment.
Sichel's legacy is a call for a more thoughtful and strategic approach to foreign policy. His critique of American interventionism and the inability to understand nuance in international relations is a warning for the present day. The historian Stephen Kinzer highlights the enduring relevance of Sichel's perspective, noting that the reaction to challenges to American primacy is still marked by a violent lashing out rather than a thoughtful policy. This impulse, Kinzer suggests, is getting stronger in recent times, making Sichel's cautionary tale all the more pertinent.
