It’s a mistake to dismiss the Cobalt allegations as Carry on Spying

The revelation that a member of the Oireachtas – given the name “Cobalt” – may have been, or possibly still is, a Russian intelligence asset has highlighted a number of critical weaknesses in Ireland’s security and intelligence infrastructure. Tánaiste Micheál Martin stated in the Dáil that there had been an unacceptable leak from a State intelligence source to the media. Moreover, as Minister for Defence – with responsibility for the military’s directorate of military intelligence – he had “never received a security briefing stating there is a spy in the Oireachtas”. The media was getting more information on this allegation than he had.
According to the Sunday Times, intelligence officers briefed a Government Minister and senior officials after Cobalt was seen travelling in the company of Russian intelligence officers in 2018. This is embarrassing for the Tánaiste; he should have been told about such a risk to national security when he took up the defence portfolio in 2022.
Other important office holders also seem to be in the dark. Ceann Comhairle Seán Ó Fearghaíl did not make a statement about the allegations. Cathaoirleach of the Seanad Jerry Buttimer offered a brief comment stating that he was not a Russian spy. The Oireachtas has the power to form a committee to investigate allegations of misconduct or broader threats to the legislature. But neither Ó Fearghail or Buttimer seemed in a hurry to recommend any course of action.
Independent Senator Tom Clonan observed that the allegations were “potentially embarrassing” but said that the whole affair was more like the 1964 British comedy film – Carry on Spying – “in terms of the gravity of it”. Some senior officials have apparently also discounted its seriousness – the alleged Russian agent was not a Minister, and he did not have access to confidential government material.
[ Ireland a ‘playground’ for Russian spies due to poor security status, says ex-Army Ranger TDOpens in new window ]
Attempts to downplay the Cobalt allegations risk fundamentally misunderstanding the objectives of foreign intelligence services. Cobalt is unlikely to have been a one-off – other agents in public office may remain undetected. And stealing government communications is often a lesser prize than the opportunity to shift public opinion and policies on issues of key importance. That is why Russia’s intelligence services have focused on penetrating democratic institutions in the EU, not least the European Parliament. The allegation that an officer of the Russian foreign intelligence service (SVR) unit – 33949 – has operated so freely in Ireland, including recruiting Cobalt, is alarming. This is a unit with a well-established track record of sowing disinformation and manipulating the private sector to steal sensitive information for “dual-use” – goods, software and technology that can also be used for military purposes.
A significant number of backbench members of the Oireachtas have built a greater media profile than some government ministers. A compromised TD or senator could have, for example, attempted to influence opinion on relations with the United Kingdom – an important adversary of the Russian state – during the heightened tensions of Brexit. Ireland and the UK have a close security partnership, not least when it comes to protecting the integrity of the Common Travel Area from malign state actors.
The State should look to how other democracies have handled espionage targeting members of parliament. New Zealand scores near the top of most international democracy indexes. But it takes its security very seriously. In 2017 New Zealand was faced with allegations that two of its MPs were engaged in espionage activity on the behalf of the Chinese state. In the aftermath of the allegations, the New Zealand government and Trevor Mallard, then the speaker of the House of Representatives and now Wellington’s ambassador to Ireland, took immediate measures to strengthen awareness of the threat to public representatives from foreign intelligence services. The speaker and New Zealand’s intelligence services have put in place a protocol to protect parliament from espionage.
Building awareness in the Oireachtas of the threat to Ireland’s interests will be challenging. The absence of an Oireachtas intelligence and security committee means that TDs and Senators do not get confidential briefings from senior intelligence officers. There is no all-source intelligence body at the heart of government to help guide policy on countering espionage and extremism, including the rapidly proliferating threat from the far right. Internal government reports and communications are often not given an appropriate security classification.
The State also lacks the capacity to undertake the type of national security vetting, including for those who working in public institutions like the Oireachtas, that is standard practice elsewhere in the EU. And whereas universities and companies in other European countries can offer assurances that their staff have passed advanced national security vetting to work on sensitive, potential dual-use technology, the lack of such a capacity in Ireland is an increasing obstacle to foreign investment from the United States and elsewhere.
The Tánaiste observed in his Dáil statement on Cobalt that he was “not comfortable with the situation pertaining to intelligence. It is very important that we have intelligence in respect of the external dimension”. Martin is right to be alarmed. The first thing the Government should do is to accelerate plans to put in place an advanced national security vetting agency fit for the 21st century. It is important that there is no repeat of the confusion that occurred in the wake of the Cobalt revelations. The Government should always be informed of serious threats to our democracy. But it must also act to deter them.
Dr Edward Burke is assistant professor in the History of War since 1945 at University College Dublin