Tuesday, February 27, 2018

James Donovan and the Bridge of Spies

          In 2015, director Steven Spielberg released a Cold War film entitled, Bridge of Spies. The movie, based off true events, portrays Tom Hanks as James B. Donovan, a lawyer and former Navy commander as well as former General Counsel to the Office of Strategic Services, during his time defending Colonel Rudolph Abel, an accused Soviet spy. Donovan was asked to defend Abel both because of his past experience working for the government and because he had been an associate prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials.
          Donovan agreed to defend Abel, believing that it would be a "public service," but also because it would be a testament to the superiority and justness of American democracy and freedom. However, once agreeing to take the case, he received threats and was labeled a "Commie lover." A newscaster even noted that Donovan had the most hated client since the British troops of the Boston Massacre that John Adams defended.
          Donovan worked hard on the case, and despite the evidence being stacked against him, he appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court on the basis that the incriminating evidence had been seized illegally without a warrant. In the Supreme Court hearing, Abel's conviction was upheld by a 5-4 decision.
          Despite losing the case, Donovan's work was not over, his next task being to prevent Abel from receiving the death penalty. While shown in the movie to have taken place during a personal visit to the judge, in reality Donovan argued in court that in the future Colonel Abel could be used as leverage in negotiations. Through this and four other points, Donovan was able to mitigate Abel's sentence to forty- five years in prison.
          Within the next three years, Donovan's hypothetical came true. We all learned in class about the U-2 crisis, in which a U-2 spy plane was shot down over Soviet airspace and American pilot, Gary Powers, was captured, but we did not learn the specifics of how it was resolved.
          Working unofficially on behalf of the CIA, Donovan acted as a negotiator in East Berlin with the main objective of reaching an agreement for the exchange of Abel for Powers. Secondary to this goal  would be for Donovan to negotiate the release of two American students that were being held captive, Frederic Pryor, being held in East Germany, and Marvin Makinen who was being held by the Soviets in Kiev. 
          The movie never mentions Makinen, but it focuses a lot on the negotiations on Abel for Powers and Pryor. At the end of the negotiations it was agreed that the exchange would take place on the Glienicke Bridge, hence the name Bridge of Spies. At this point the movie moves towards its climax where it shows an intense scene on the bridge as the exchange takes place. Remarkably, Donovan was able to negotiate the trade of Abel for both Powers and Pryor. And even though Makinen was not freed at the time Donovan had opened the door for his release a year later.
          Donovan would go on to achieve further feats including writing a book and negotiating an even larger prisoner exchange, but perhaps that will be left for another time.




Works Cited:
https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/2016-featured-story-archive/the-negotiator.html

https://news.fordham.edu/fordham-magazine/metadiplomat-the-real-life-story-of-bridge-of-spies-hero-james-b-donovan/

https://www.biography.com/people/rudolf-abel-101415

4 comments:

  1. Ari -- This was a really interesting post because it served as a reminder about the threat of communist and how looming it was over the American public. I wonder if Spielberg was trying to make a statement (maybe not political but some statement) through this movie. Often those that surround truer stories create larger impacts and Donovan's certainly hits towards American politicians addressing specific instances in history that are valuable to our textbooks. I was somehow reminded of the movie "Schindler's List", another Spielberg movie that is particularly heart wrenching and speaks about a true story with a man shielding those who were targets for the Holocaust. How does a movie provide as a better medium compared to a book? How does this artistry pertain to the way a public may react?

    Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/10/26/bridge-of-spies-ignores-the-most-important-character-of-the-cold-war/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Your post was very informative and although I watched the movie when it came out a few years ago, it was hard to make the connection to history without the background on the Cold War that I now know. Granted, James B. Donovan was an incredible individual that accomplished great political feats, his actions during the U-2 crisis were actually supported by a more well known figure: John F. Kennedy. In fact, Kennedy was in the background of the negotiations for the release of Powers and the students, and would negotiate, along with Donovan, to try to resolve some of the cold war tensions that were plaguing the two nations.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/10/26/bridge-of-spies-ignores-the-most-important-character-of-the-cold-war/?utm_term=.48a2306df8fd

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for writing this interesting post relating what we've learned in class to the information that this movie provides. I found it particularly interesting that in defending Abel in order to prove the justness of the American legal system, Donovan was labeled a traitor to America. The conclusion that can be drawn is that with the Cold War in full swing, people simply wanted to kill the communist spy rather than demonstrate moral superiority. Why was this so? Didn't the American people see the value of showing that their system was superior?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ari, I thought this was a great way to get a closer look at one of the more important events of the Cold War. I also remember watching the movie, and what struck me then still interests me now, the fact that Donovan and Abel grew to respect each other through their ordeal. Donovan respected Abel for his abilities and comportment during the trial and exchange, and Abel respected Donovan for his skill in diplomacy and for his history in the espionage world. Abel understood that this was a man who could empathize with his experience and struggle as a spy. The mutual respect borne between two men of vastly different ideologies and loyalties is a testament to the potential of reconciliation between opposing sides. Perhaps the divided today can learn from the journey of these two men.

    https://news.fordham.edu/fordham-magazine/metadiplomat-the-real-life-story-of-bridge-of-spies-hero-james-b-donovan/

    ReplyDelete