This book makes Azef comprehensible both as a political figure & as a human being. The author has created a singularly compelling & evocative portrait of a man, a way of thinking, & an endlessly fascinating place & time. To friends & followers, Azef was a powerful, steadfast, & impenetrable. They speak of his quiet authority, his master of detail, his patience, determination, & concern for their welfare. But others declare him a repulsive personality. Their Azef is a cold & menacing figure feared for his cruel tongue & distrusted for his inscrutability -- a man in whom some essential human characteristic seemed always to be missing.
Richard E. Rubenstein is an author and University Professor of Conflict Resolution and Public Affairs at George Mason University, holding degrees from Harvard College, Oxford University, and Harvard Law School.
Sixty years after Boris Nicolaevsky wrote his account of the notorious Ievno Azef — the most infamous police agent to ever infiltrate a revolutionary organisation — Richard E. Rubenstein took a crack at the same subject. His book, published 30 years ago, is very readable and well-researched. It’s probably a better introduction to the Azef case than Nicolaevsky’s. Interestingly, Rubenstein says he learned more about what might have motivated Azef to betray his comrades from John LeCarre’s fiction than from other sources. To me, the Azef case — like those of Roman Malinovsky and Josef Stalin — is endlessly intriguing, and teaches us much about how underground revolutionary parties functioned in tsarist times, and how they were manipulated by the Okhrana, the tsarist police.
This is not a completely bad book but I could not recommend it over 'Aseff: the Russian Judas' by Boris Nicolaievsky or Roman Goul's 'Asef'. I also have reservations about any historical work which lists John Le Carre's 'A Perfect Spy' as contributing to his insights. Nor do I think much of a work published in 1994 which refers to works by W. Bruce Lincoln from 1987 and James H. Billington from 1966. The author doesn't present much evidence of archival research - even in such USA resources as the Hoover Institute - and certainly not in Russia but there is no evidence he reads Russian. But then Richard Rubenstein is a professor of Conflict Resolution and Public Affairs - not a real historian but a researcher steeped in only secondary literature. He believes he has new insights on Aseff/Comrade Valentine and is highly critical of Nicolaievsky but doesn't support his more favourable interpretation with any sources - perhaps the imaginative influence John Le Carre is enough.
A perfectly adequate biography but I would recommend anyone seriously interested to go back to original sources - or even better search out what is being written in Russia from new sources these days