Difficult Divorce Stirs New Questions in CIA Spy Case

The Central Intelligence Agency placed accused spy Harold J. Nicholson in a sensitive overseas post even though such assignments generally were avoided for agents embroiled in difficult divorces, according to U.S. intelligence sources.

The CIA moved Nicholson from Bucharest, Romania, where his marriage had collapsed, directly into a new posting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, where Nicholson allegedly began spying for Russia in 1994.

CIA officials insist that there is no iron-clad, written policy covering such cases. But sources said the agency’s standard practice for officers in its espionage arm, the directorate of operations, is to keep them in the United States until their divorces or other pending legal matters have been settled. The theory is that personal turmoil increases chances of a security breach.

Nicholson, the highest-ranking CIA officer ever charged with spying for Moscow, was arrested at Washington’s Dulles International Airport last month by FBI agents disguised as members of the airport grounds crew. Officials allege that he was about to board a flight for Zurich, Switzerland, to meet his Russian spy handlers.

He has been indicted by a federal grand jury on one count of espionage and charged with passing classified secrets to Russian intelligence in exchange for $180,000.

As more information about the case comes to light, some facts seem to conflict with the public assertions by the CIA and the FBI that their handling of the matter was an unquestioned counterintelligence victory for the United States.

In a press conference after Nicholson’s arrest, CIA Director John M. Deutch and FBI Director Louis J. Freeh stressed that Nicholson, 46, was arrested more rapidly than suspects in previous spy cases due to counterintelligence reforms put in place after the Aldrich H. Ames spy scandal in 1994. Nicholson allegedly had been working for the Russians for two years.

But while the CIA may have arrested Nicholson more rapidly than earlier spy suspects, preventive measures that might have pointed to Nicholson as a potential problem either were not effective or not in place.

In July 1992 for example, officials at the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest sent a classified cable to the State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service, which handles security at American embassies, and to the U.S. Embassy in Kuala Lumpur asking that Nicholson be interviewed by State Department security personnel.

State Department sources described the request as routine. But several former CIA officials said they do not believe that it was routine for State Department security officials to interview undercover CIA officers.

The cable--sent through the Diplomatic Security Service channel--did not mention that Nicholson had any problems and indicated that the interview should be conducted because Nicholson had just served in a sensitive post in a high-risk location.

Yet some officials who served at the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest have said they were concerned at the time that the turmoil in Nicholson’s life might make him a security risk. In Bucharest, Nicholson’s wife, Laura, had become noticeably reclusive. The stress of a grim and isolated life in post-Communist Eastern Europe appeared to have shattered the Nicholson marriage.

It could not be determined whether Nicholson was in fact interviewed by the Diplomatic Security Service after his arrival in Kuala Lumpur. CIA and FBI officials said they were unaware of the cable or of the State Department’s request.

Nicholson’s case also raises new questions about whether the CIA is doing enough to help undercover officers deal with personal stress. While personal sacrifices have always been demanded of CIA officers, the end of the Cold War has taken away the sense of mission that once helped motivate CIA officers, making those personal costs harder to justify.

The FBI and CIA believe that Nicholson began working for the Russians in June 1994, after meeting for the fourth time with an official at the Russian Embassy in Kuala Lumpur--a meeting that had been authorized by his station chief. Nicholson, then assigned as the CIA’s deputy station chief there, was in the final stages of his divorce and child-custody battles.

Nicholson had served previously as the CIA’s station chief in Bucharest from 1990 to 1992. He and his wife separated at the end of his tour of duty there in June 1992, and she filed for divorce in Washington state after they returned to the United States for home leave.

Their divorce and custody proceedings dragged on for two more years and were not settled until August 1994. Court records show that the long-distance divorce and custody battle consumed much of Nicholson’s time and energy.

CIA officials, under a court-imposed gag order preventing them from talking about the Nicholson case with the press, refused to say whether Nicholson officially notified the agency about his divorce proceedings. Nicholson arrived in Kuala Lumpur with his three children but without his wife, who stayed in the Pacific Northwest.

Even if Nicholson had not officially notified the agency, it was apparent that he and his wife, who had always accompanied him on his previous assignments, had separated.

The directorate of operations usually requires officers in the midst of divorce to take an assignment at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., or at another domestic office until the court case is settled, sources said. That practice is designed to reduce potential security risks.

Among the potential risks is a situation in which a bitter spouse could threaten to expose an undercover officer as leverage in a divorce or custody battle.

Nicholson’s wife never threatened to expose his identity. But if standard practice had been followed and he had been forced to stay in the United States until his divorce and custody fight were resolved and his personal life was stable, Nicholson probably would not have been authorized to meet with Russian officials at a Russian Embassy at a time when he badly needed money.