Developing Doctrinal Terminology

I will refrain from raising things I have already discussed on numerous occasions, but I want to further clarify a matter that has to do with agents. In the past, we used to think of the term ‘agent’ as designating only (or mainly) turned elements from the antagonistic classes. It was not all-inclusive. We knew from firsthand operational experience that, in actual struggle, agents constituted covert assets employable in routine surveillance as well as in case-related operational activity. While we now allow ourselves to continue to recruit such assets from among the elements of the antagonistic classes, we should also, in the same way, proceed to recruit them from among the masses and the activists – or even from among Communist Party and Youth League members – as long as they possess the necessary qualifications. To assume that our agents may only be recruited from among the elements of the antagonistic classes, not from among our own base of masses and activists, or to maintain that only individuals from the antagonistic classes serving operational needs may be spoken of as agents (while individuals recruited from among our own base of masses and activists serving operational needs may not) is to have an incomplete understanding.