Advertisement

A Nation Betrayed? The Klaus Fuchs Atomic Espionage Case Reconsidered

  • Christoph Laucht
Chapter
  • 84 Downloads

Abstract

After their return from Los Alamos to the United Kingdom, Rudolf Peierls’s and Klaus Fuchs’s ways parted: while Peierls resumed his professorship at Birmingham University, Fuchs joined the AERE Harwell where he became head of the theoretical physics division. Harwell formed part of the British nuclear energy programme which was established in 1947 with the firm decision to develop and test a British atom bomb and to explore civilian applications of atomic power. While Klaus Fuchs worked at Harwell, which was concerned with civilian applications of atomic power, he also occasionally served as adviser to the British nuclear weapons development project which was at the time headquartered at Fort Halstead in Kent before moving to Aldermaston in Berkshire in 1950.1

Keywords

Manhattan Project Weimar Republic Court Hearing Hydrogen Bomb American Relation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 1.
    Gowing, Independence and Deterrence, II, 3, 144–5.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jessica Wang, American Science in an Age of Anxiety: Scientists, Anticommunism & the Cold War (Chapel Hill, 1999), p. 297 note 3.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garry Wills, Bomb Power: The Modern Presidency and the National Security State (New York, 2010), p. 1.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    This is the title of Peter Hennessy’s book The Secret State: Preparing for the Worst 1945–2010, 2nd edn (2002; London, 2010).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gowing, Independence and Deterrence, II, 116–17.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ‘The Case of Dr. Klaus Fuchs’, 2 March 1950, TNA, KV 2/1253, p. 3.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    United States. Cong. House. Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, Soviet Atomic Espionage, 82nd Cong., 1st sess. (Washington, DC: GPO, 1951), unpaginated.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Metropolitan Police Special Branch, ‘Hearing, before The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Goddard, at the Old Bailey on 1st March 1950, of the case against Klaus Emil Julius FUCHS, arraigned on indictment (four counts) under the Official Secrets Act, 1911, Section 1’, TNA, KV2/1264, p. 23.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moorehead, The Traitors, p. 58.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Downing to Harbo, RE: Foocase, espionage, 9 March 1950, Klaus Fuchs FBI File, 65–58805, vol. 15, serials 720–80; Detlev Peukert, Die Weimarer Republik: Krisenjahre der Klassischen Moderne (Frankfurt a.M., 1987), pp. 243–65.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    W. J. Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs. Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Interviews’, 31 January 1950, TNA, KV 2/1250, p. 1;’ statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Emil Fuchs, Mein Leben, II, 189, 201–02. The records of the local government office for registration of residents in the City of Kiel indicate that Emil Fuchs and his wife, two sons and one daughter moved from Eisenach to Kiel on 12 May 1931, ‘Auskunft des Archivs des Einwohnermeldeamtes Kiel’, Stadtarchiv Kiel, Kiel, Germany, Klaus Fuchs folder.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ’statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 1. Fuchs later reiterated this point; Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bernhardt Schell, ‘Introduction’, in Einstein, Anschütz and the Kiel Gyro Compass, the Correspondence between Albert Einstein and Herrmann Anschütz-Kaempfe as well as other Documents, ed. by Dieter Lohmeier and Bernhardt Schell, tr. by Anita Cervenâk, 2nd rev. edn (Kiel, 2005), pp. 13–87 (pp. 57–66).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Einstein to Anschütz, 12 July 1922, in Einstein, Anschütz and the Kiel Gyro Compass (see Schell, above), pp. 168–9 (p. 169).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Michael Legband, ‘Von der Provinz zum Bundesland — Schleswig-Holstein im 20. Jahrhundert’, in Schleswig-Holstein von den Ursprüngen bis zur Gegenwart: Eine Landesgeschichte, ed. by Jann Markus Witt and Heiko Vosgerau (Hamburg, 2002), pp. 327–83 (p. 330).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Peter Wulf, ‘Zustimmung, Mitmachen, Verfolgung und Widerstand — Schleswig-Holstein in der Zeit des Nationalsozialismus’, in Geschichte Schleswig-Holsteins: Von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart, ed. by Ulrich Lange, 2nd edn (Neumünster, 2003), pp. 585–621 (p. 588).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Christoph Cornelißen, ‘Die Universität Kiel im “Dritten Reich”’, in Wissenschaft an der Grenze: Die Universität Kiel im Nationalsozialismus, ed. by Christoph Cornelißen and Carsten Mish (Essen, 2009), pp. 11–29; Peter Wulf, ‘Die Stadt auf der Suche’, pp. 357–8.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dittrich, pp. 175–82. See also the Hedwig Gerth’s testimony; ‘Report, Made by Joseph C. Walsh, RE: Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 9 November 1950, Klaus Fuchs FBI File, 65–58805, vol. 41, serials 1457–500;’ statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reuven Golan, ‘Aus der Erlebniswelt eines jüdischen Jugendlichen in Kiel Anfang der dreißiger Jahre’, in ‘Wir bauen das Reich’: Aufstieg und erste Herrschaftsjahre des Nationalsozialismus in Schleswig-Holstein, ed. by Erich Hoffmann and Peter Wulf (Neumünster, 1983), pp. 361–8 (p. 366).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dittrich, pp. 180–2. See Eve Rosenhaft, Beating the Fascists?: The German Communists and Political Violence, 1929–1933 (Cambridge, 1983).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Emil Fuchs, Mein Leben, II, 221;’ statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 3.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Emil Fuchs, Mein Leben, II, 200–1; Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs; ‘Statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 4.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    SAC, NY, to Director, FBI, RE: Foocase, espionage, 26 July 1950, the Los Alamos National Laboratory Archives, Los Alamos, New Mexico, United States (hereafter LANL), VFA 529; Downing to Harbo.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    ’statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 5.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    SAC, NY, to Director, FBI, p. 26; Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs. Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Interviews’, p. 2.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    ’secret Report, Soviet Embassy, GDR’, 9 April 1986, Klaus Fuchs personal file (‘Lichnoe delo Fuks Klaus’), the Comintern Archives, the Russian States Archive of Socio-Political History, Moscow, Russian Federation (hereafter RGASPI), Komintern, F. 495, op. 205, d. 6612, p. 4. I am grateful to Serge Simonov for translating the RGASPI files from Russian into English.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs; ‘Statement by Klaus Fuchs to Hugh Clegg and Robert J. Lamphere, Wormwood Scrubs Prison, London, England, May 26, 1950’, LANL, VFA 529, p. 1.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    SAC, New York, to Director, FBI, pp. 6–7; Ruth Werner, Sonjas Rapport, new expanded edn (Berlin, 2006), p. 292.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    ‘The Case of Dr. Klaus Fuchs’, p. 2. On Fuchs’s espionage activities see also ‘The Case of Dr. Klaus Fuchs — Appendix B: Summary of Information Obtained from Dr. Fuchs Regarding His Espionage Contacts’, 2 March 1950, TNA, KV 2/1253.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Werner, Sonjas Rapport, new expanded edn, pp. 289–95. Ursula Kuczynski went by several names: after her marriage she became Ursula Hamburger but was also known as Ruth Werner and Sonja Ludwig; Ursula Kuczynski (Ursula Hamburger; Sonja Ludwig) personal file (‘Lichnoe delo Kuchinski Ursula [Gamburger Ursula, Liudvig Sonia]’), RGASPI, Komintern, F. 495, op. 205, d. 1721.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Klaus Fuchs operated, at first, under the code name ‘Rest’ which was changed to ‘Charles’ in May 1944; Alexander Feklisov and Sergei Kostin, The Man Behind the Rosenbergs: Memoirs of the KGB Spymaster Who also Controlled Klaus Fuchs and Helped Resolve the Cuban Missile Crisis, tr. by Catherine Drop (New York, 2001), p. 416 note 54.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    W. J. Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 9 March 1950, TNA, KV 2/1879.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    ‘Jürgen Kuczynski’, 11 March 1950, TNA, KV 2/1879, p. 3.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    SAC, New York, to Director, FBI, pp. 1–3; W. J. Skardon, ‘Interrogation of Dr. Fuchs by Officers of the F.B.I.’, 9 June 1950, TNA, KV 2/1255, p. 1; Joseph C. Walsh, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs, was’, 10 October 1950, Klaus Fuchs FBI File, 65–58805, vol. 39, serials 1432–54.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    ‘The Case of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 24 November 1950, TNA, KV 2/1256, pp. 5, 12.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hyde, pp. 1–48.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Robert Lamphere and Tom Shachtmann, The FBI-KGB War: A Special Agent’s Story (New York, 1986), pp. 85–6, 133. On the Venona files, see also John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America (New Haven, 1999).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hoover to McMahon, 6 April 1950, Klaus Fuchs FBI File, 65–588805, vol. 28, serials 1039–105.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Szasz, British Scientists, p. 83.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gowing, Independence and Deterrence, II, 144–53.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    J. C. Robertson, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 7 September 1949; J. C. Robertson, ‘Meeting with W/Cdr. Arnold on 9th September, 1949’, 9 September 1949; J. C. Robertson, ‘Klaus Fuchs. Further Investigation Plan’, 12 September 1949, TNA, KV 2/1246.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Szasz, British Scientists, pp. 83–4.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hyde, p. 99; J. C. Robertson, ‘Proposed Interrogation of Fuchs’, 16 December 1949, TNA, KV 2/1249.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 22 December 1949, pp. 3, 6.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    J. C. Robertson, ‘Action following Fuchs Interrogation’, 21 December 1949, TNA, KV 2/1249.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    W. J. Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs. Second Interview’, 2 January 1950, TNA, KV 2/1249; Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs. Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Interviews’, p. 1.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs. Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Interviews’, p. 1.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rudolf Peierls, ‘The Lessons of the Fuchs Case’, n.d., Peierls Papers, b. 197, A 16, p. 3.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    ’statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’. A typescript of the statement is available in TNA, KV 2/1250.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    ’statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, pp. 6–7. Fuchs himself continued to apply the term ‘controlled schizophrenia’ to describe his actions. See, for example, Fuchs to Genia Peierls, 6 February 1950, Peierls Papers, sup. cat., D.52. In the MfS interview Fuchs provided a detailed overview of his tactics, including the befriending of his colleagues; Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Robertson, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 23 November 1949, pp. 11, 18.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Katrina Mason, Children of Los Alamos: An Oral History of the Town Where the Atomic Age Began (New York, 1995), p. 136.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Stephen Toulmin, ‘The Conscientious Spy’, New York Review of Books, 19 November 1987, pp. 54–60 (p. 56).Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hedy [sic] Bretscher, interview by John Bennett and Anne Shepherd, 21 June 1984, AIP, p. 42.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Fuchs to Rotblat, 2 October 1946; Rotblat to Fuchs, 10 October 1946; Fuchs to Rotblat, 24 December 1946; Rotblat to Fuchs, 6 January 1947; Fuchs to Rotblat, 11 February 1947, RTBT, D. 191; Rotblat to Fuchs, 18 February 1947, RTBT, D. 82A.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Fuchs to Bretscher, 13 May 1948, the Papers and Correspondence of Egon Bretscher, Churchill Archives Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom (hereafter BRER), BRER, H. 29.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hanni Bretscher, note, 1 April 1987, attached to letter, Fuchs to Bretscher, 13 May 1948, BRER, H. 29. Emil Fuchs visited England from autumn 1947 until spring 1948; Mein Leben, II, 287–9.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs. Herbert Skinner even offered Fuchs financial help to pay for a solicitor, J. C. Robertson,’ subject: Klaus Emil Julius Fuchs’, 6 February 1950, TNA, KV 2/1661, p. 1. Support was not restricted to Harwell colleagues. F. C. Champion, for example, also offered help to find a solicitor for Fuchs; Peierls to Champion, 6 February 1950, Peierls Papers, MS Eng. Misc. b. 223, F6.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Metropolitan Police Special Branch, p. 24.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    ‘Record of Interview with Dr. K. Fuchs on 30th January, 1950 by M.W. Perrin’. The description given by Fuchs here is almost identical with that provided by him in Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    ’statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 10.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs; Henry DeWolf Smyth, Atomic Energy for Military Purposes: The Official Report on the Development of the Atomic Bomb Under the Auspices of the United States Government, 1940–1945 (Princeton, 1945; repr. Stanford, 1989).Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Goodman, ‘Grandfather of the Hydrogen Bomb’, p. 6; Goodman, Spying on the Nuclear Bear, pp. 20–1; ‘Record of Interview with Dr. K. Fuchs on 30th January, 1950 by M.W. Perrin’, p. 4; Jeffrey Richelson, Spying on the Bomb: American Nuclear Intelligence from Nazi Germany to Iran and North Korea (New York, 2006), p. 65;’ statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 10Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Hoover to Neal, Subject: Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs Espionage — R, 18 June 1950, Klaus Fuchs FBI File, 65–58805, vol. 36, serials 1346–66, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Alexander Feklisov, ‘Podvig Klaus Fuksa’, Voenno-Istoricheskii Zhurnal, 12 (1990), 22–9; Alexander Feklisov, ‘Podvig Klaus Fuksa’, Voenno-Istoricheskii Zhurnal, 1 (1991), 34–43.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    David Holloway, Stalin and the Bomb: The Soviet Union and Atomic Energy, 1939–1956 (New Haven, 1994), p. 222. Montgomery Hyde, for example, estimated that Fuchs helped save the Soviets about 18 months in their plutonium bomb project (p. 222).Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Yuli Khariton and Yuri Smirnov, ‘The Soviet Bomb: The Khariton Version’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (hereafter BAS), 49. 4 (May 1993), 20–31. Fuchs himself made a similar point; Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Goodman, Spying on the Nuclear Bear, pp. 7–56.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    ‘Record of Interview with Dr. K. Fuchs on 30th January, 1950 by M.W. Perrin’, p. 5.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Ladd to Hoover, Re: Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs, 1 February 1950, Klaus Fuchs FBI File, 65–58805, vol. 3, serials 83–171.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Holloway, pp. 174–8, 199, 222–3; Rainer Karlsch, Uran für Moskau: Die Wismut — Eine populäre Geschichte (Berlin, 2007).Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    This is discussed in Goodman, ‘Grandfather of the Hydrogen Bomb’, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Herken, Brotherhood of the Bomb, p. 219; Priscilla McMillan, The Ruin of J. Robert Oppenheimer: And the Birth of the Modern Arms Race (New York, 2005), pp. 65–6.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Arnold, Britain and the H-Bomb, pp. 24, 131–50; Richard Rhodes, Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb (New York, 1995), pp. 523–5.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    ‘The Case of Dr. Klaus Fuchs. — Appendix A’, 2 March 1950, TNA, KV 2/1253, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    ‘The Case of Dr. Klaus Fuchs. — Appendix A’, p. 1.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gowing, Independence and Deterrence, II, 147–8.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Goodman, ‘Grandfather of the Hydrogen Bomb’, pp. 15, 22.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    ‘The Case of Dr. Klaus Fuchs. — Appendix A’, 2 March 1950, p. 2.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Robertson, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 23 November 1949, pp. 6, 9, 19.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Max Born, My Life, p. 284. See also Nevill Mott’s reply to Born’s allegations in a note on the same page.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Nevill Mott, A Life in Science (London, 1986), p. 50.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Peierls, interview by Weiner, p. 153.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Mott, A Life in Science, p. 51.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    SAC, New York, to Director, FBI, pp. 4–5; Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs; Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 22 December 1949, p. 2.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Max Born, My Life, p. 284.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    David Vincent, The Culture of Secrecy: Britain, 1832–1998 (Oxford, 1998), p. 206.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Joan Mahoney, ‘Civil Liberties in Britain During the Cold War: The Role of the Central Government’, American Journal of Legal History, 33. 1 (1989), 53–100 (pp. 82–92).Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Akers to Peierls, 2 May 1949, Peierls Papers, sup. cat., A. 13.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Peter Hennessy and Gail Brownfeld, ‘Britain’s Cold War Security Purge: The Origins of Positive Vetting’, Historical Journal, 25. 4 (1982), 965–74 (pp. 968–70).Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Vincent, pp. 1–25, 194–210.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Metropolitan Police Special Branch, pp. 3, 24, 25.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Robert Williams, Klaus Fuchs, p. 3.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Metropolitan Police Special Branch, pp. 11, 17–18.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    ‘Atomic Secrets Betrayed: Fuchs Sentenced to 14 Years’, The Times, 2 March 1950, p. 6. This sentiment of betrayal lasted; see, for instance, Justin Atholl, ‘How the Man to Whom Britain gave Shelter became Our Deadliest Traitor’, Sunday Express, 3 March 1952, TNA, KV 2/1258.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Chapman Pincher, ‘Fuchs Gave Bomb to Russia’, Daily Express, 2 March 1950, p. 1. Fuchs’s obituary, for example, also drew on this myth; John Ellison,’ spy Who Gave Russia Atom Bomb Dies at 76’, Daily Express, 29 January 1988, p. 15.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Weart, p. 121.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Chapman Pincher, ‘World’s No. 1 Spy — as He Is Today’, Daily Express, 5 November 1965, p. 5. See also Chapman Pincher, ‘The Strange New Twist in the Story of Fuchs the Traitor... and Its Fascinating Question: Would You Ever Help a Spy?’, Daily Express, 22 November 1955, p. 3; and Chapman Pincher, ‘The Great Spy Purge Shambles: From Fuchs to Bettaney. Moles Who Slipped the Nest’, Daily Express, 19 April 1984, p. 10.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    J. C. Robertson, ‘Press Comments on DR. Fuchs’ Espionage Methods & Comments.’, 7 March 1950, TNA, KV 2/1254.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Christopher Andrew, The Defence of the Realm: The Authorized History of MI5 (London, 2009), p. 388.Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    See, for example, an advertisement for a series of articles by Alan Moorehead, titled ‘Atom-Bomb Traitors’ and published in the Sunday Times, 20 June 1952, p. 5; Rebecca West, ‘The Terrifying Impact of the Fuchs Case’, New York Times, 4 March 1951, pp. 10, 29, 31.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Alan Moorehead, The Traitors: The Double Life of Fuchs, Pontecorvo and Nunn May (London, 1952; repr. New York, 1963).Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Oliver Pilat, The Atom Spies (New York, 1952).Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Justin Atholl, ‘How Fuchs Was Found Out: Clue by Clue the World’s Deadliest Spy Is Trapped in Britain’, Sunday Express, 10 February 1952, TNA, KV 2/1258.Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    John Squire, ‘Three Atomic Scientists and Their Betrayals’, Illustrated London News, 26 July 1952, p. 2.Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Rebecca West, ‘The Traitors’, Evening Standard, 4 June 1951, TNA, KV 2/1257.Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Rebecca West, The Meaning of Treason (London, 1945); Rebecca West, The Meaning of Treason, 2nd enlarged and rev. edn (London, 1952); Rebecca West, The New Meaning of Treason (New York, 1964).Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Rebecca West, ‘The Hearts of Traitors’, Picture Post, 17 January 1953, pp. 25, 27–9, 31, 33.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Rebecca West, ‘The Terrifying Impact of the Klaus Fuchs Case’, New York Times Magazine, 4 March 1951, pp. 6, 29–34 (pp. 31–2). An MI5 report drafted in November 1950 put forth a similar idea declaring that ‘Fuchs was an ideological Communist and became a spy for that reason’; ‘The Case of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 5.Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    ‘The Case of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 5.Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    H. Wynn Parry, ‘Deprivation of Citizenship Committee, British Nationality Act, 1948, re Klaus Emil Julius Fuchs’, 30 January 1951, TNA, KV 2/1257.Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Executive Producer to the Under Secretary of State, Home Office, Whitehall, 2 January 1951; Williams to the Under Secretary of State, Home Office, Whitehall, 3 February 1951, TNA, KV 2/1257.Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Samuel Epstein and Beryl Williams, The Real Book of Spies (Garden City, 1953; repr. London, 1959).Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    E. D. O’Brien, ‘A Christmas Hamper of Books for Children’, Illustrated London News, 5 December 1959, p. 820.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    David Reynolds, ‘Great Britain’, in The Origins of the Cold War in Europe: International Perspectives, ed. by David Reynolds (New Haven, 1994), 77–95 (pp. 80–1).Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    The development of this anti-Communist consensus is still debated, see Richard Thurlow, The Secret State: British Internal Security in the Twentieth Century (Oxford, 1994), pp. 285–6; Peter Weiler, British Labour and the Cold War (Stanford, 1988), pp. 189–229.Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Douglas Hyde, I Believed: The Autobiography of a Former British Communist (London, 1950); The God That Failed: Six Studies in Communism by Arthur Koestler, Ignazio Silone, André Gide Presented by Enid Starkie, Richard Wright, Louis Fischer, Stephen Spender, ed. by Richard H. S. Crossman (London, 1950).Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    ‘Has Professor J. B. S. Haldane Left the Communist Party? Report Last Night Follows Week of Mystery’, Sunday Express, 12 November 1950, p. 1.Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, 22 December 1949, p. 1.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Rebecca West, New Meaning of Treason, p. 361.Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Moorehead, The Traitors, p. 58. Moorehead even called The Traitors in the new preface to the 1963 edition ‘a book about conscience’ (p. ix).Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Herbert Skinner, ‘The Atomic Bomb Conspiracy’, n.d., Papers of Professor Herbert W. B. Skinner, FRS, Special Collections and Archives, Sidney Jones Library, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom (hereafter SJL), D.982/3/5, p. 6.Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Stanley Goldberg, ‘The Secret about Secrets’, in Secret Agents: The Rosenberg Case, McCarthyism & Fifties America, ed. by Marjorie Garber and Rebecca L. Walkowitz (New York, 1995), pp. 47–58 (p. 51); Chapman Pincher, Traitors: The Anatomy of Treason (New York, 1987), pp. 276–80; Chapman Pincher, Too Secret Too Long (London, 1984), p. 87; Richard Trahair, ‘A Psychohistorical Approach to Espionage: Klaus Fuchs (1911–1988)’, Mentalities, 9. 2 (1994), 28–49 (p. 29).Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Skardon, ‘Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs. Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Interviews’, p. 1; ‘Record of Interview with Dr. K. Fuchs on 30th January, 1950 by M. W. Perrin’, TNA, KV 2/1253, p. 5;’ statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 9.Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    ‘Record of Interview with Dr. K. Fuchs on 30th January, 1950 by M. W. Perrin’, p. 5.Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Hyde, p. 103.Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Lorna Arnold, Britain and the H-Bomb, pp. 25–6; Goodman, ‘Grandfather of the Hydrogen Bomb’, pp. 1–22. Both Cockroft and Peierls were also in favour of promoting Fuchs owing to his achievements; Cockroft to Peierls, 22 June 1948; Peierls to Cockroft, 24 June 1948, Peierls Papers, b. 205, C66.Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Goodman, ‘Grandfather of the Hydrogen Bomb’, p. 22.Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Michael Goodman, ‘Who Is Trying to Keep What Secret from Whom and Why? MI5-FBI Relations and the Klaus Fuchs Case’, Journal of Cold War Studies, 7. 3 (Summer 2005), 124–46 (pp. 132–4).Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Goodman, ‘Grandfather of the Hydrogen Bomb’, p. 20. On the technical details Fuchs passed on to the Soviet Union, as he told the FBI, see, for example: Hoover to AEC, Re: Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs Espionage — R, 15 June 1950, Klaus Fuchs FBI file, 65–58805, vol. 36, serials 1346–66.Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Hoover to Neal, p. 2. The FBI agents were accompanied by William Skardon; Skardon, ‘Interrogation of Dr. Fuchs by Officers of the F.B.I.’Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Vincent, p. 202.Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Moorehead, The Traitors, p. 172.Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Hennessy and Brownfeld, p. 970. On Britain and McCarthyism, see also John P. Rossi, ‘The British Reaction to McCarthyism, 1950–54’, Mid-America, 70. 1 (1988), 5–18.Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Stephen Guy, ‘High Treason (1951): Britain’s Cold War Fifth Column’, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, 13. 1 (1993), 35–47; Tony Shaw, British Cinema and the Cold War: The State, Propaganda and Consensus (London, 2001), pp. 40–5.Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    ‘The Case of Dr. Klaus Fuchs. — Appendix A’, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Peter Galison and Barton Bernstein, ‘In Any Light: Scientists and the Decision to Build the Superbomb, 1952–1954’, HSPS, 19. 2 (1989), 267–348 (pp. 310–12).Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    ‘A Week of Shock and Decision: A Hint That We Have Lost the Arms race — the Order to Make the H-Bomb — a Plea to Wage Peace — the Espionage Case against an Atomic Spy’, Life, 13 February 1950, pp. 36–7 (p. 36).Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    ‘14 Years For “Grossest Treachery”: Fuchs Gets Limit under British Law — but It Does Not Conclude the Case’, Life, 13 March 1950, pp. 42–3; ‘A Look at the World’s Week’, Life, 6 July 1959, pp. 37–8, 40 (p. 40).Google Scholar
  144. 144.
    Groves, pp. 143–4.Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    Gowing, Independence and Deterrence, II, 145–50; Robert Williams, Klaus Fuchs, pp. 141–50.Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    John H. Manley, ‘A New Laboratory Is Born’, in Reminiscences of Los Alamos (see Edwin McMillan, above), pp. 21–40 (pp. 37–8).Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    ‘The Case of Dr. Klaus Fuchs. — Appendix A’, p. 2.Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    David Reynolds, Britannia Overruled: British Policy & World Power in the 20th Century (London, 1991), p. 159.Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Robert A. Goldberg, Enemies Within: The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America (New Haven, 2001), p. 26.Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Ellen Schrecker, ‘Before the Rosenbergs: Espionage Scenarios in the Early Cold War’, in Secret Agents (see Stanley Goldberg, above), pp. 127–41 (p. 136). On Communists as conspirators in American culture, see also Robert Goldberg, pp. 22–46.Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Ellen Schrecker, No Ivory Tower: McCarthyism and the Universities (New York, 1986), pp. 8, 131, 142.Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    David Kaiser, ‘The Atomic Secret in Red Hands? American Suspicions of Theoretical Physicists During the Early Cold War’, Representations, 90 (Spring 2005), 28–60 (p. 28).Google Scholar
  154. 154.
    J. Edgar Hoover, ‘The Crime of the Century: The Case of the A-Bomb Spies’, Reader’s Digest, 58 (May 1951), 149–68 (p. 155).Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    See, for example, ‘Atomic Spy Trials: A Summary of the Trials’, BAS, 7. 4 (April 1951), 125–6; ‘Dr. Klaus Fuchs to Stand Trial’, BAS, 6. 3 (March 1950), 68, 94; Eugene Rabinowitch, ‘Atomic Spy Trials: Heretical Afterthoughts’, BAS, 7. 5 (May 1951), 139–42, 157;’ soviet Atomic Espionage’, BAS, 7. 5 (May 1951), 143–8.Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Lawrence Badash,’ science and McCarthyism’, Minerva, 38. 1 (2000), 53–80 (p. 60).Google Scholar
  157. 157.
    Joseph Albright and Marcia Kunstel, Bombshell: The Secret Story of America’s Unknown Atomic Spy Conspiracy (New York, 1997), p. 112.Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    Richard Fried, Nightmare in Red: The McCarthy Era in Perspective (New York, 1990), p. 115.Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    See Cyndy Hendershot, Anti-Communism and Popular Culture in Mid-Century America ( Jefferson, 2003).Google Scholar
  160. 160.
    Metropolitan Police Special Branch, pp. 24–5. For an assessment of the impact Klaus Fuchs’s confession had on Anglo-American nuclear relations see also Richard J. Aldrich, The Hidden Hand: Britain, America and Cold War Secret Intelligence (London, 2001), pp. 380–4.Google Scholar
  161. 161.
    Makins to Colville, 24 May 1952; Colville to Makins, 26 May 1952, TNA, PREM 11/2799.Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    John Moser, Twisting the Lion’s Tail: American Anglophobia Between the World Wars (New York, 1999), pp. 172–4.Google Scholar
  163. 163.
    Robert Norris, Racing for the Bomb: General Leslie R. Groves, the Manhattan Project’s Indispensable Man (South Royalton, 2002), p. 327; Septimus Paul, p. 41. Whitehall was aware of the American attempts to exclude British scientists from sensitive parts of the project, see, for instance, Akers to Chancellor of the Exchequer, Re: Tube Alloy Project: Access to American Full-Scale Plant Information, 6 April 1944, TNA, CAB 126/331.Google Scholar
  164. 164.
    Rebecca West, New Meaning of Treason, p. 195.Google Scholar
  165. 165.
    Metropolitan Police Special Branch; a copy of the transcript was also forwarded to J. Edgar Hoover; Whitson to Director, FBI, Re: Foocase, 3 March 1950, Klaus Fuchs FBI File, 65–58805, vol. 21, serials 897–915.Google Scholar
  166. 166.
    On the Klaus Fuchs case and Anglo-American relations, see Goodman, ‘Who Is Trying to Keep What Secret from Whom and Why’, pp. 124–46.Google Scholar
  167. 167.
    ’statement of Emil Julius Klaus Fuchs’, p. 8.Google Scholar
  168. 168.
    Sillitoe to Rowlands, 19 January 1950, TNA, KV 2/1250.Google Scholar
  169. 169.
    Goodman, ‘Who Is Trying to Keep What Secret from Whom and Why’, pp. 130–1.Google Scholar
  170. 170.
    Metropolitan Police Special Branch, p. 22.Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    Prof. Dr. Klaus Fuchs.Google Scholar
  172. 172.
    Michael S. Goodman and Chapman Pincher, ‘Research Note: Clement Attlee, Percy Sillitoe and the Security Aspects of the Fuchs Case’, Contemporary British History, 19.1 (2005), 67–77. The day following Fuchs’s trial, the Daily Mirror, for example, had run the headline ‘MI5 Duped for 6 Years — Why?’ on its front page (2 March 1950). When a 1951 article by Rebecca West questioned MI5’s practice of security checks in the Fuchs case again, Percy Sillitoe reaffirmed to the prime minister that it was not his service’s fault that Fuchs was not exposed earlier; Sillitoe to Rickett, 5 June 1951, TNA, KV 2/1257. Whitehall and the Foreign Office also monitored American press and media coverage of Fuchs’s trial; Sir O. Franks to Whitehall and Foreign Office, RE: Press and Radio Comment on the Trial and Sentence of Dr. Fuchs, 10 March 1950, TNA, KV 2/1254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    See the correspondence between MI5 and Alan Moorehead:’ supplementary Notes on Fuchs’ background given to Mr. Alan Moorehead on Monday, 24th September, 1951’, TNA, KV 2/1257. On Fuchs’s mother, see Emil Fuchs, Mein Leben, II, 204–6.Google Scholar
  174. 174.
    Belmont to Ladd, Re: ‘The Traitors’, Book by Alan Moorehead, British Author, 2 June 1952, Klaus Fuchs FBI File, 65–58805, vol. 42, serials 1501–66.Google Scholar
  175. 175.
    On the Pontecorvo case, see Simone Turchetti, ‘Atomic Secrets and Governmental Lies: Nuclear Science, Politics and Security in the Pontecorvo Case’, British Journal for the History of Science, 36. 4 (2003), 389–415.Google Scholar
  176. 176.
    Septimus Paul, pp. 166–87.Google Scholar
  177. 177.
    Turchetti, ‘Atomic Secrets and Governmental Lies’, pp. 408–9.Google Scholar
  178. 178.
    Central Office of Information, Their Trade Is Treachery (London, 1964), unpaginated picture inlet.Google Scholar
  179. 179.
    Ministry of Supply and Central Office of Information, Harwell: The Atomic Energy Research Establishment (London, 1952). The same year the New York-based Philosophical Society published the booklet under the same title in the United States.Google Scholar
  180. 180.
    ‘Berlin Impressed by Allied Note’, The Times, 15 May 1952, 6.Google Scholar
  181. 181.
    ‘The Man to Whom Fuchs Confessed’, New Scientist, 24 January 1957, 27–8 (p. 28).Google Scholar
  182. 182.
    Cited in ‘Entente Cordiale Under Strain’, The Times, 20 August 1959, p. 8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Christoph Laucht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Laucht
    • 1
  1. 1.University of LeedsUK

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options