Satan's Spy (The Steve Church saga Book 2) André Gallo (top 100 books of all time checklist TXT) 📖

Abu Ghraib would not have taken place. Lives would have been saved. We would have been spared the Guantanamo abuses. Need I go on? This is our chance to avoid another gigantic mistake.”

Deuel stopped in front of his picture window and gazed absentmindedly at a cardinal circling and landing in the branches of the oak below. He said, “Without reliving the events leading to the war, let me remind you that the lesson of 9/11 was that we were at war. We really had been at war for some time, but we willingly ignored the killings of CIA officers and other Americans abroad, and the attack on the U.S.S. Cole. After 9/11, the priority was to prevent another attack.

Everyone agreed that Iraq was a potential supplier of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons to the terrorists.”

His voice rose in sound and passion. “Christ! Aaron, we’re still at war! Iran wants to be the dominant power in the Middle East and is ready to annihilate Israel to do it. Even if the Islamic Republic doesn’t attack the Jewish State, it would still become an irresistible force. Don’t think that Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and others won’t get their own nukes. Will this make the world safer? I’m telling you that your article will harm the country. It’s your country too, isn’t it?”

A hawk circling above the oak seemed to have the cardinal in his sights. “Now Walter, don’t wave the flag at me.              This operation, if indeed you have one in Iran, will cause unintended consequences.”

“Why does your publication always assume either that we are wrong or that we will fail? We are a risk-taking organization. By definition, results from risk-taking are never a sure thing, or it wouldn’t be called risk, would it? That’s our job. Unfortunately, that’s the type of information that earns Pulitzers. Aaron, I’m asking you not to print this article.”

“Walter, I don’t think that I can do that. Let me review it one more time. I will hold it for a day or so. No other promises. Let’s be clear.”

“Aaron, just one more thought. If you run this story and we don’t succeed, I will remind you of this conversation. One way or the other, Aaron, you’ll never be able to go back to Israel.” Deuel knew that Glick’s son had celebrated his Bar Mitzvah in Israel the year before.

There was slight pause. “Walter, are you threatening?”

Speaking with less volume but equal intensity, Deuel replied, “Absolutely not. I thought we were talking about unintended consequences.”

“We’ll pick this up tomorrow. Goodbye.”

The cardinal emerged from his branch heading toward the trees around the VIP parking lot. The hawk curled his wings and plunged like a missile to intercept his prey. They both disappeared from Deuel’s sight, and he returned to his desk.

In his office, Aaron Glick picked up the draft article from his desk and read it again.

THE CIA AND RISK/REWARD IN IRAN, by David Bonifacio The CIA’s HUMINT, human spying – the only sure way to learn what the enemy’s intentions are – has always been suspect; witness Iraq. However, the CIA has recently decided to blunder ahead, this time in Iran. The CIA is risking our foreign policy in the Middle East on its ability to do HUMINT right. Has it heard of the risk-reward approach, weighing the potential risk against the potential reward?

     Spying, or as KGB spy Kim Philby described it, “Acquiring secrets illegally,” has never been America’s favorite pastime, nor its strength. As a people, we have never gone beyond the principle expressed by former Secretary of State Henry L. Stimson, ‘Gentlemen don’t read each other’s mail’.

He skimmed ahead.

However, a high definition satellite photograph of tanks doesn’t inform policy makers whether the tanks will attack. Capabilities are easy. Intentions are harder.

     Espionage is illegal in all countries. To do their jobs without getting caught, spies need cover like the human body needs air. Would it be rational to populate our new Interest Section in the Swiss Embassy in Tehran with spies, in effect giving them diplomatic cover? Wasn’t that our mistake in 1979? Is the national memory long enough to recall “The Nest of Spies” episode? Or will the CIA send its spies under business cover, what the CIA terms “out-of-embassy”? If they get arrested, how will we react? Deny their existence and let them die in the name of incompetence? Submit to Iranian blackmail to save them? In any case, the hope for fruitful bilateral relations with the most dangerous country in the Middle East could be destroyed.

     Is the CIA making a grievous error and leading us into problems much more serious, and lethal, than not knowing exactly the number of atomic weapons that Iran is building? If this administration is successful in engaging Iran in a civil diplomatic exchange – we know that threats and bullying have not worked (Surprise!) –we will finesse the danger that the CIA may very well trigger. A high level official has stated anonymously that we already know what we need to know about Iran’s intentions. Their saber rattling is mostly for domestic consumption, bluster without the ability to back it up.

     Iran is now in the middle of a political campaign. It would dearly like to catch an American spy and put him up in front of the world’s cameras to ridicule the Great Satan yet again. Will we never learn?

     Is the military-industrial complex looking for a reason to “nuke Iran”? Is the danger of possible war worth the questionable reward of a high-risk HUMINT operation managed by an organization with a poor track record?

Glick put the paper back on his desk. It was more of an op-ed. than a news article, but it still belonged on the front page. He stood, took a step outside of his office and said, “Rachel, tell Bonifacio to come up.”

 

19. Tehran: Mousavi’s Office

Ambassador Hill’s