THE HOME OF WATCH CULTURE

How spies and soldiers help keep mechanical watches relevant

How spies and soldiers help keep mechanical watches relevant

Jamie Weiss

One of the biggest sources of inspiration and storytelling in modern watch design, alongside diving and aviation, is the armed forces. The development of many horological innovations and formats owe their genesis to warfare: field watches, fliegers, rotating bezels… Watch enthusiasts love the romance or aesthetic of hardy timepieces you might find strapped to the wrists of strapping soldiers. Watch brands similarly love trading on the perceived glamour of espionage – usually with fictional spies like James Bond, but also (mostly implicitly) with real-world intelligence operatives.

Of course, a lot of this is just that: storytelling. Just as few professional divers use mechanical dive watches as their primary dive timers, most spies and soldiers don’t wear mechanical watches. Yet, at the same time, the world’s militaries and intelligence services are potentially some of the only professional fields left where there’s a genuine use case for mechanical watches.

micromilspec milgraph wrist
Micromilspec Milgraph

The first reason why mechanical watches remain relevant in military and intelligence is because there’s a strong security argument for them. “In many military contexts, electronics, quartz movements, and smart watches are prohibited due to concerns over traceability,” Henrik Rye, CEO of Micromilspec – an independent Norwegian watchmaker that’s built its business primarily as a military contractor and a maker of custom unit watches – explains.

“For example, in sensitive environments such as control rooms or classified operations, electronic devices could potentially be monitored or tracked, which compromises security. In contrast, an automatic watch, with its purely mechanical movement, does not have the same vulnerabilities and is therefore permitted,” Rye says.

strava heatmap afghanistan
A US military base in Helmand Province, Afghanistan revealed by jogging routes on Strava’s heatmap.

This concern is not unfounded. Back in 2017, fitness tracking app Strava publically released a global ‘heatmap’, visualising the exercise routes of hundreds of millions of users. However, as The Guardian reports, it also revealed the layouts, locations, staffing and routines of military bases and spy outposts around the world, including US military bases in Afghanistan. Soldiers’ jogging routes, whether that was down the halls or along the fenceline of a base, were lit up for the world to see thanks to the smartwatches or fitness trackers they had strapped to their wrists. That’s a serious failure of operational security… Of course, you have no such concern with a mechanical watch.

starfish prime
The debris fireball of Starfish Prime, a 1962 high-altitude US nuclear test that caused an EMP that damaged electrical infrastructure in Hawaii, 1,450 km away from its detonation point.

Another argument in favour of mechanical watches is that, unlike quartz or smart watches, mechanical watches are theoretically resistant to electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks. While non-nuclear EMP weapons remain mostly the stuff of fiction (at least for now), nuclear electromagnetic pulses and NEMP weapons are very much real. As the Washington State Department of Health relates, “a 1.4 megaton bomb launched about 250 miles above Kansas would destroy most of the electronics that were not protected in the entire Continental United States.”

Rolex GMT Master II 126718GRNR
Rolex GMT-Master II ref. 126718GRNR

However, there’s also a use case for wearing an expensive mechanical watch as an intelligence operative: a valuable timepiece is a handy tool for tradecraft. Watches of Espionage (WoE), a brilliant watch blog run by an anonymous former undercover officer for the CIA that’s dedicated to the intersection of timepieces and spycraft, explains that a nice watch can be used to curry favour with an asset, or if shit really hits the fan, can (theoretically) be used extract yourself from a sticky situation out in the field. It’s that old-fashioned mindset – a Rolex is always worth something kind of vibe – and just as it is for us civilians, a watch is also a great conversation starter.

“A digital tool watch like a G-Shock, Suunto, Timex, Garmin etcetera is a more effective timepiece for the average warfighter [but] for intelligence officers who focus more on building relationships, recruiting sources and working with third-country intelligence services, watches do play a role in both curating a perception as a professional and building relationships through gifts,” he explains.

IWC Big Pilot
The IWC Big Pilot might not be worn by many on-duty pilots these days, but it remains popular among the intelligence community.

The classic quartz versus mechanical debate also rears its head when considering military/intelligence use too, he elaborates. “There is a debate within the intel/spec ops community about what is a better tool watch for operations between quartz and automatic, but I think it is less about security risks and more about reliability. Of course, the quartz movement is better at keeping time, but the trade-off is that it can run out of battery, which always happens at the worst time. The majority of modern military-issued watches (CWC SBS, Marathon, Elliot Brown) are actually all quartz, with the exception of maybe Sinn for the Germans.”

tudor black bay 58 dgsi wristshot caseback
A Tudor Black Bay 58 unit watch of the DGSI (Direction Générale de la Sécurité Intérieure), France’s primary domestic intelligence service. Never offered for public sale, this watch could only be acquired by DGSI personnel.

But what about the million-dollar question – what do spooks and soldiers actually wear these days? “There are definitely brands that mil/intel/spec ops gravitate to,” WoE says. “Seiko is definitely common due to robustness, affordability and ties to our heritage, but I am seeing a lot more Christopher Ward and Bremonts due to their unit watch programs. At the higher end, Tudor and Omega are common [as well as] Breitling and IWC, particularly for aviation guys. Rolex used to be common in the ’90s and 2000s… But now they are so expensive and hard to get!”

Breitling Chronomat B01 Titanium
There’s a common saying in the intelligence community, too: “sketchy dudes wear Breitling”.

That touches on a good point: brands with well-established unit watch programs, like the aforementioned brands or independents like Micromilspec or Bausele, will always be popular among intelligence and military personnel. Despite everything I’ve written so far, though, the reality is that much like it is for civilians, the choice between quartz/smart and mechanical is often an aesthetic or financial one.

Casio G Shock Mudman GW 9500 black on wrist
Casio G-Shock Mudman GW-9500

As WoE puts it: “For the most part, I would argue the current embracing of automatic watches within the military and intel world is more about culture than actual utility… Digital tool watches and now smartwatches are the most common watches worn by those in NatSec.”

Anecdotally, when I reached out to members of my own family serving in the Australian Defence Forces, their take was that most ADF members they know just wear G-Shocks. So perhaps this is all just storytelling too…