What do you think?
Rate this book
Spy Handler: Memoir of a KGB Officer: The True Story of the Man Who Recruited Robert Hanssen and Aldrich Ames
In his four decades as a KGB officer, Victor Cherkashin was a central player in the shadowy world of Cold War espionage. From his rigorous training in Soviet intelligence in the early 1950s to his prime spot as the KGB's head of counterintelligence at the Soviet embassy in Washington, Cherkashin's career was rich in episode and drama. In a riveting memoir, Cherkashin provides a remarkable insider's view of the KGB's prolonged conflict with the CIA. Playing a major role in global espionage for most of the Cold War, Cherkashin was posted to stations in the United States, Australia, India, and Lebanon. He tracked down U.S. and British spies around the world. But it was in 1985 that Cherkashin scored two of the KGB's biggest-ever coups. In April of that year, he recruited disgruntled CIA officer Aldrich Ames and became his principal handler. Six months later, FBI special agent Robert Hanssen contacted Cherkashin directly, eventually becoming an even bigger asset than Ames. In Spy Handler, Cherkashin offers the complete account of how and why both Americans turned against their country, and addresses the rumors of an undiscovered KGB spy-another Hanssen or Ames-still at large in the U.S. intelligence community. Full of vivid detail and dramatic accounts that shed stark new light on the inner workings of the KGB, Spy Handler is a major addition to Cold War history, told by one of its major players.
364 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 28, 2004
130 people are currently reading
1982 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews
September 26, 2008
This is Victor Cherkashin's story about his 40-year career as a KGB officer. It provides a good inside look at spying. Both the CIA and KGB used very similar tactics, just on different sides. I like how Victor gives a very honest and realistic history of his career, and he tells his story without any kind of Cold War bias. One very interesting point that Victor makes is that most people do not decide to betray their country and spy for another one due to a disbelief in their country's idealogy. If you want to know why, you will need to read the book.
February 7, 2010
Not only did I find this interesting just because of the Aldrich Ames/Robert Hanssen connection but also from what the perspective of a KGB agent during the cold war. Never really thought about what life was life from that perspective. He painted a portrait of hard work under poor paying conditions, but a true, loyalist to his government. And when the iron curtain fell I actually felt bad for him...he wrote as though to be torn apart by it. Was pleasantly surprised by this book. Very good and extremely interesting.
April 16, 2020
Interesting and engaging story of the careeer of Victor Cherkashin, the KGB officer who handled Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen. A very well-written, straightforward account of his life and career, although being a memoir, I suspect it’s to some degree self-serving.
January 7, 2024
Way too many names and dates for me to keep up with as it did not go in chronological order. However, hearing about all the ins and outs of the KGB, CIA, and FBI was pretty cool. Especially this this took place decades ago and things were so different then with communication and technology in general. Very interesting read.
November 8, 2024
A very interesting book and also a very readable and well-written one. The author was a KGB officer for 40 years, mainly serving in counterintelligence. In the 1980s, while stationed in DC, he successfully handled both Ames and Hanssen, and his takes on them and Cold War espionage are thoughtful and at times surprising. The latter half of the book focuses more on him being pushed out of the KGB as the USSR crumbled and the subsequent scapegoating of him for Ames's arrest, though he was retired by then.
January 9, 2010
Pretty interesting read about the KGB and CIA battles of the 70s, 80s, and 90s, told in memoir form by the former handler of KGB spies Robert Hanssen and Aldritch Ames. Most interesting is the viewpoint of the "enemy" in regards to the spy games the two agencies were involved in -- it helps give a clearer picture of the conflict as a whole, rather than focusing on the propaganda and agenda of one side. The memoirist Victor Cherkashin also offers up some interesting insight on the state of America's intelligence services as recently as the Bush II administration, and offers his views on what the roles of post-Soviet Russian and US intelligence agencies should take in regards to each other and the world.
Mostly though, this is a pretty entertaining and illuminating look into how intelligence and counter-intelligence games are played. I for one never knew that fake tree branches containing listening devices even existed, let alone actually used.
Mostly though, this is a pretty entertaining and illuminating look into how intelligence and counter-intelligence games are played. I for one never knew that fake tree branches containing listening devices even existed, let alone actually used.
May 25, 2012
Interesting book,
one thing that caught my eye, Aldrich Ames was partly motivated to spy because he was angry how the CIA was lying to Congress about the threat the Soviet Union posed to the US.
It did that to get MORE MONEY.
Also the author makes the point that most of the spying was just a game of trying to recruit agents to spy on the other side and uncovering "moles" the other side has.
The CIA has probably cost over 3 TRILLION dollars in the last 65 years,
and we have nothing of value to show for it.
Russia is not a credible threat to us, or anyone else,
WHY ARE WE WASTING MONEY ON THIS GAME???
The author gives brief details of many types of technology each side used. A lot of amazing science/technology here.
one thing that caught my eye, Aldrich Ames was partly motivated to spy because he was angry how the CIA was lying to Congress about the threat the Soviet Union posed to the US.
It did that to get MORE MONEY.
Also the author makes the point that most of the spying was just a game of trying to recruit agents to spy on the other side and uncovering "moles" the other side has.
The CIA has probably cost over 3 TRILLION dollars in the last 65 years,
and we have nothing of value to show for it.
Russia is not a credible threat to us, or anyone else,
WHY ARE WE WASTING MONEY ON THIS GAME???
The author gives brief details of many types of technology each side used. A lot of amazing science/technology here.
December 15, 2012
This was quite good. Not quite as good as Oleg Kalugin's Spymaster. Still, worth a read. Lots of interesting lines about who can really be approached to be turned and such.
March 24, 2014
4.5/5
An interesting look at the Cold War from the inside of the KGB. Very interesting when paired with other works about the spy game, especially Legacy of Ashes by Tim Weiner.
An interesting look at the Cold War from the inside of the KGB. Very interesting when paired with other works about the spy game, especially Legacy of Ashes by Tim Weiner.
December 28, 2014
A must read for any Cold War history enthusiast.
February 24, 2018
How could this book miss? a KGB officer tells all from the Russian point of view about all of the happenings of the cold war and beyond. Victor Cherkasin after 40 years of work is cynical about the benefits to be derived from the expense of the spy game and this assessment fits right into my belief system. In America we have had the Russian spy, Kim Philby sitting at the top of American intelligence and later Robert Hanssen and Aldrich Ames on the inside of the FBI and CIA sharing our deepest secrets with the Russians. America has many spy's implanted in the Russian society sharing Russia's deepest secrets, so what has been accomplished?
The book states unequivocally that Russia was not involved in the assassination of JFK, Russian intelligence saw Lee Harvey Oswald as a kook! yet, the book is silent on Russian theories about that assassination. Reminds me of Sherlock Holmes observation of the barking dog!
At the end of this book, Cherkasin, tells us that the American invasion of Iraq, was not about WMD but about Oil! He also states that the CIA was not consulted on the matter and had no blame for providing false information on WMD. This of course, is contrary to the American spin that blames the CIA for a failure in intelligence gathering. On this point, you have to agree with the Russian observation. As Cherkasin states, we had people on the ground identifying sights to be destroyed after and during the invasion, so why wasn't the lack of WMD's identified earlyon? Cherkasin is right, the American people were told a lie by its government.
Another interesting point is the stated reason for writing the book. Cherkasin says, that he wrote the book because of the accusations made about him after his retirement. Namely, that he betrayed the mole Aldrich Ames. He denies this yet, contends that it was another Russian spy who betrayed Ames. I have recently finished reading "Circle of Treason" written by CIA officers who claim it was their investigation over a number of years that dug out the mole - Ames, who do you believe?
One final thought about this remarkable book, Cherkasin repeatedly talks about his pension, yet, he states in the final analysis that it amounted to practically nothing? Cherkasin while a KGB officer was also a bureaucrat, he took vacations, he talked about his pension, he worked the bureaucracy to get a better apartment for his family, and a dacha for his vacations and retirement. So in many ways, he was just a government employee putting in his 40 years of service. For some reason, and maybe because I put in 32 years of government service and had many of the same thoughts, this resonated with me, maybe Russians and Americans are a lot alike, we just spy on each other! I recommend this book to anyone who likes the genre of spying.
The book states unequivocally that Russia was not involved in the assassination of JFK, Russian intelligence saw Lee Harvey Oswald as a kook! yet, the book is silent on Russian theories about that assassination. Reminds me of Sherlock Holmes observation of the barking dog!
At the end of this book, Cherkasin, tells us that the American invasion of Iraq, was not about WMD but about Oil! He also states that the CIA was not consulted on the matter and had no blame for providing false information on WMD. This of course, is contrary to the American spin that blames the CIA for a failure in intelligence gathering. On this point, you have to agree with the Russian observation. As Cherkasin states, we had people on the ground identifying sights to be destroyed after and during the invasion, so why wasn't the lack of WMD's identified earlyon? Cherkasin is right, the American people were told a lie by its government.
Another interesting point is the stated reason for writing the book. Cherkasin says, that he wrote the book because of the accusations made about him after his retirement. Namely, that he betrayed the mole Aldrich Ames. He denies this yet, contends that it was another Russian spy who betrayed Ames. I have recently finished reading "Circle of Treason" written by CIA officers who claim it was their investigation over a number of years that dug out the mole - Ames, who do you believe?
One final thought about this remarkable book, Cherkasin repeatedly talks about his pension, yet, he states in the final analysis that it amounted to practically nothing? Cherkasin while a KGB officer was also a bureaucrat, he took vacations, he talked about his pension, he worked the bureaucracy to get a better apartment for his family, and a dacha for his vacations and retirement. So in many ways, he was just a government employee putting in his 40 years of service. For some reason, and maybe because I put in 32 years of government service and had many of the same thoughts, this resonated with me, maybe Russians and Americans are a lot alike, we just spy on each other! I recommend this book to anyone who likes the genre of spying.
May 26, 2020
Cherkashin provides an excellent overview of his time in the KGB. He avoids the pitfalls of other intelligence memoirs that try to impress the reader by revealing some profound insight or by inflating their own accomplishments. Cherkashin realizes that it is simply enough for a good memoir to say what happened while providing enough outside context to allow the reader to understand the individual's place in history.
One insight of Cherkashin's memoir is that the spy-vs-spy world of the KGB and CIA was very much dictated by realistic assumptions about national and human character. In Cherkashin's account, appealing to ideology was never as successful as simple entrapment or bribing of intelligence officers on either side of the Cold War. Cherkashin also rightly points out that recruiting and running clandestine intelligence officers rarely provides high-level insight (the kind that would shape national-level decision making) into the adversary that a reasonable observer could not otherwise discern. Although Cherkashin does not get into it, what makes a good intelligence service is its ability to process and analyze information from multiple sources to inform decision making. What Cherkashin does provide an example of is how oftentimes petty bureaucratic rivalries lead national-level decision makers to overvalue, dismiss, or make up their own raw information or intelligence judgments.
Perhaps the most important lesson of Cherkashin is that an intelligence service, and a country itself, are best served by spies and political leaders who act professionally and according to their values. The Soviet Union ultimately collapsed as the KGB promoted weak leaders and its value system collapsed. At its lowest, the US failed internationally when policy makers ignored intelligence and promoted unprofessional people to high positions. As the US confronts adversaries in the future, its intelligence officers and policy makers should take heed of these lessons.
One insight of Cherkashin's memoir is that the spy-vs-spy world of the KGB and CIA was very much dictated by realistic assumptions about national and human character. In Cherkashin's account, appealing to ideology was never as successful as simple entrapment or bribing of intelligence officers on either side of the Cold War. Cherkashin also rightly points out that recruiting and running clandestine intelligence officers rarely provides high-level insight (the kind that would shape national-level decision making) into the adversary that a reasonable observer could not otherwise discern. Although Cherkashin does not get into it, what makes a good intelligence service is its ability to process and analyze information from multiple sources to inform decision making. What Cherkashin does provide an example of is how oftentimes petty bureaucratic rivalries lead national-level decision makers to overvalue, dismiss, or make up their own raw information or intelligence judgments.
Perhaps the most important lesson of Cherkashin is that an intelligence service, and a country itself, are best served by spies and political leaders who act professionally and according to their values. The Soviet Union ultimately collapsed as the KGB promoted weak leaders and its value system collapsed. At its lowest, the US failed internationally when policy makers ignored intelligence and promoted unprofessional people to high positions. As the US confronts adversaries in the future, its intelligence officers and policy makers should take heed of these lessons.
August 25, 2025
Hokay. First, a disclaimer: the author's life was surely exceptional, and thrilling, and full of twists and turns and excitement.
It's just—none of that came through in the book. This read like a Wikipedia entry in first person, dutifully chronicling each phase of the author's career. Narrative nonfiction this was not. (And while plenty of memoirs also wouldn't be classified as narrative nonfiction, there's a real difference between being able to tell a bunch of stories and... whatever this was. A retelling of facts, figures, and dates.
It didn't help that each chapter had its own roster of non-overlapping characters (as you'd expect from a very capable counterintelligence officer), with dense Russian names and brief mentions. Even his two children—despite being born something like 15 years apart, and opposite genders—were difficult to distinguish from one another: one was named Alyosha and the other Alyona. While I could tell you 1-2 facts each about how the author's career impacted them (or vice versa), I'm hard pressed to say for sure whch kid was which.
It got to a point where I was 70% in, realized that if I didn't care by that point I was never going to, and I decided to just skim the rest of the book, through what I imagine were supposed to be the most gripping chapters. Maybe if I'd been prepped with the story of these two agents (Robert Hanssen and Aldrich Ames) and could see this book as essential backstory, I could've stayed hooked. On its own, though, this was nearly a DNF.
It's just—none of that came through in the book. This read like a Wikipedia entry in first person, dutifully chronicling each phase of the author's career. Narrative nonfiction this was not. (And while plenty of memoirs also wouldn't be classified as narrative nonfiction, there's a real difference between being able to tell a bunch of stories and... whatever this was. A retelling of facts, figures, and dates.
It didn't help that each chapter had its own roster of non-overlapping characters (as you'd expect from a very capable counterintelligence officer), with dense Russian names and brief mentions. Even his two children—despite being born something like 15 years apart, and opposite genders—were difficult to distinguish from one another: one was named Alyosha and the other Alyona. While I could tell you 1-2 facts each about how the author's career impacted them (or vice versa), I'm hard pressed to say for sure whch kid was which.
It got to a point where I was 70% in, realized that if I didn't care by that point I was never going to, and I decided to just skim the rest of the book, through what I imagine were supposed to be the most gripping chapters. Maybe if I'd been prepped with the story of these two agents (Robert Hanssen and Aldrich Ames) and could see this book as essential backstory, I could've stayed hooked. On its own, though, this was nearly a DNF.
February 18, 2019
This book does a fantastic job of telling a story of cold war espionage from a very different angle than I've heard before: from a Soviet intelligence officer who still thinks that system was the best one. The majority of the book is him walking through his experience in the KGB and in that talking about some of the more interesting cases (Ames, Hanssen) he worked on. Hearing both his perspective on those cases, as well as the tradecraft involved, was incredibly interesting and well worth the read.
The end of the book was focused on his grievances with the KGB beurocracy and the fall of the Soviet Union and was much less interesting.
The most interesting detail of the book to me is the author's perspective on exactly what intelligence was and accomplished. He asserts multiple times that, rather than actually serving the goals of the state, most of what the spy agencies accomplished in the Cold War was really just hunting other spies. He additionally talks about information they get from defectors never as an intelligence success but solely as lucky breaks. I'm still mulling over how much truth there is in either of these assertions, my instinct is that both have some truth but are exaggerated, but it was very interesting hearing those arguments from someone who had been so much on the inside of the intelligence game.
The end of the book was focused on his grievances with the KGB beurocracy and the fall of the Soviet Union and was much less interesting.
The most interesting detail of the book to me is the author's perspective on exactly what intelligence was and accomplished. He asserts multiple times that, rather than actually serving the goals of the state, most of what the spy agencies accomplished in the Cold War was really just hunting other spies. He additionally talks about information they get from defectors never as an intelligence success but solely as lucky breaks. I'm still mulling over how much truth there is in either of these assertions, my instinct is that both have some truth but are exaggerated, but it was very interesting hearing those arguments from someone who had been so much on the inside of the intelligence game.
September 23, 2018
Finally- a Russian intelligence officer's view on the matter of international espionage! And this book remains the veiled member of the very few, because the 90's era of openness is gone forever.
Of course, a memoir like Victor Cherkashin's is always partial, but so is History herself. His dear enemies from the CIA have published their own memories after retirement, but we in the west are more used to those views.
Welcome Cold War 2.0. We'll be seeing many Russian Intelligence Officers in upcoming novels and movies. Instead of casting them as the classic Bond villains, I hope that we will see the spirit of C. J. Sansom's Dominion where two counterparts fight bloody- each one believing that he is right.
The letters KGB sound sexy and dangerous- ah, the stuff of spy stories. The aura of secret mysticism surrounds the organisation today: the FSB. That's the way the intelligence community likes it. You cannot do that job without secrecy.
I love spy novels, as you might have noticed from my list of books and reviews. It's a genre with it's own tropes.
Of course, a memoir like Victor Cherkashin's is always partial, but so is History herself. His dear enemies from the CIA have published their own memories after retirement, but we in the west are more used to those views.
Welcome Cold War 2.0. We'll be seeing many Russian Intelligence Officers in upcoming novels and movies. Instead of casting them as the classic Bond villains, I hope that we will see the spirit of C. J. Sansom's Dominion where two counterparts fight bloody- each one believing that he is right.
The letters KGB sound sexy and dangerous- ah, the stuff of spy stories. The aura of secret mysticism surrounds the organisation today: the FSB. That's the way the intelligence community likes it. You cannot do that job without secrecy.
I love spy novels, as you might have noticed from my list of books and reviews. It's a genre with it's own tropes.
October 23, 2019
This is the memoir of the high-ranking KGB officer who recruited Aldridge Ames and Robert Hanssen to spy for the Soviet Union in what turned out to be its waning days. It also covers Cherkashin's whole career, providing useful insight into how espionage worked on many different levels.
The operational aspects of Spy Handler are very informative, but I have doubts on most of Cherkashin's commentary. You always need to keep in mind Putin's remark 'once a KGB officer, always a KGB officer', so how much can you trust a KGB memoir (without turning into James Angleton!)? I will need to check more detailed biographies of Ames and Hanssen to get a more complete picture - Cherkashin downplays the American investigative role in their captures but that comes across as misinformation. Similarly, his positioning of the KGB as the underdog against the CIA isn't that convincing. Still, this is an excellent read and very useful for further investigation. 8/10.
The operational aspects of Spy Handler are very informative, but I have doubts on most of Cherkashin's commentary. You always need to keep in mind Putin's remark 'once a KGB officer, always a KGB officer', so how much can you trust a KGB memoir (without turning into James Angleton!)? I will need to check more detailed biographies of Ames and Hanssen to get a more complete picture - Cherkashin downplays the American investigative role in their captures but that comes across as misinformation. Similarly, his positioning of the KGB as the underdog against the CIA isn't that convincing. Still, this is an excellent read and very useful for further investigation. 8/10.
June 12, 2017
The author is the KGB agent that, among many, ran Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen. A couple of things in the book struck me - despite the fact that the author was a very high ranking KGB agent he could not get good housing. when posted in Moscow he was in a 500m sq. apartment with his wife, his son and his wife, and his daughter. Secondly, Ames and Hanssen greviously depleted the ranks of KGB agents spying in America by revealing the double agents. The Soviets summarily exicuted KGB agents selling information to CIA or FBI agents. The CIA and FBI missed oh so many clues that Ames and Hanssen were double agents but the culture of the two organizations made it difficult for managers to conceive that an agent would spy for the Soviets.
April 21, 2018
I enjoy reading books about Americans who decided to spy against their country and this is told from an interesting perspective, the KBG man who helped runs two of the most dangerous spies against America Robert Hanssen and Aldrich Ames. I think the recruited used in the title is a bit of a misnomer since both Ames and Hansen were walk ins who volunteered their services they were not recruited. Cherkashin is one of the ones who decided that they were legit people with information they wanted not moles sent by the US. Also has a nice perspective on Cold War spying and the strengths and weakness of both the KGB and CIA/FBI. As he states in the opening of the book this is not James Bond stuff it’s the basics of intelligence gathering and the recruitment of agents.
September 8, 2023
As veterans of the Cold War and the intelligence "games" this Soviet is still playing, my wife and I found this disappointing, laughable, infuriating, and mostly misleading.
He often, as liars do, contradicts himself within the same chapter while trying to paint himself an intellectual humanitarian who only regretfully found ways to send his fellow Soviets back for execution.
Hansson and Ames are barely covered and no new revelations of their betrayals or handling are in this book. Indeed, original and early newspaper accounts were more accurate than most of his claims. Certainly he is still playing the game, and must, as a guy living in Moscow and still selling security.
He often, as liars do, contradicts himself within the same chapter while trying to paint himself an intellectual humanitarian who only regretfully found ways to send his fellow Soviets back for execution.
Hansson and Ames are barely covered and no new revelations of their betrayals or handling are in this book. Indeed, original and early newspaper accounts were more accurate than most of his claims. Certainly he is still playing the game, and must, as a guy living in Moscow and still selling security.
November 9, 2025
The author was KGB's counterintelligence chief in the 1980s (retired just prior the August '91 coup).
He was handling two of the most damaging US spies in history, Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen
For Americans in general, he says "Americans were easy; they needed money more than loyalty".
A lot of insider information can be gleaned by reading the book, so this is another one of must-reads for any Cold War aficionado.
There are descriptions of how the KGB helped instigate or foster some anti-war demonstrations throughout the US and a gripping account of the fall of the Berlin wall.
He's not settling any scores, so it's a good book to read from that perspective as well.
5/5
He was handling two of the most damaging US spies in history, Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen
For Americans in general, he says "Americans were easy; they needed money more than loyalty".
A lot of insider information can be gleaned by reading the book, so this is another one of must-reads for any Cold War aficionado.
There are descriptions of how the KGB helped instigate or foster some anti-war demonstrations throughout the US and a gripping account of the fall of the Berlin wall.
He's not settling any scores, so it's a good book to read from that perspective as well.
5/5
February 1, 2021
Published 16 years ago, Cherkashin sets out to make espionage seem mundane.
However, reading his memoir, brought me flashbacks to scenes in FX channel series, The Americans which was anything but mundane. Together with the Netflix documentary series Spycraft, Spy Handler seems to be a basis for thrilling television stories that are anything but mundane. Besides The Americans, there's Showtime's series Homeland with Claire Danes and Amazon's series' Jack Ryan.
Though Jack Ryan was inspired by a different author, spycraft is endemic in the series.
However, reading his memoir, brought me flashbacks to scenes in FX channel series, The Americans which was anything but mundane. Together with the Netflix documentary series Spycraft, Spy Handler seems to be a basis for thrilling television stories that are anything but mundane. Besides The Americans, there's Showtime's series Homeland with Claire Danes and Amazon's series' Jack Ryan.
Though Jack Ryan was inspired by a different author, spycraft is endemic in the series.
July 2, 2023
As someone who was obsessed with The Americans, I wanted to find this book a lot more interesting than I actually did. It never grabbed me. A lot of it felt very mundane, though. There are a couple of exciting pieces involving the two Americans referenced on the cover. I liked reading about recruitment tactics. I liked reading about the drop sites, and I liked reading about the arrangements for those, but otherwise, it never really held my interest. I'm glad to have read something from this perspective, but I'm also glad to be done with it.
August 12, 2021
Awesome Book
This book is not soley about Ames or Hannsen. Its an overview view of the author's life and career in the KGB. Its a really good book. I wonder though...does the author provide just enough historical info to make it believeable, but he leaves out key KGB secrets ..making the book a an overt plant of misinformation? Makes me think, what if?.. and thats kind if the point though, huh?
This book is not soley about Ames or Hannsen. Its an overview view of the author's life and career in the KGB. Its a really good book. I wonder though...does the author provide just enough historical info to make it believeable, but he leaves out key KGB secrets ..making the book a an overt plant of misinformation? Makes me think, what if?.. and thats kind if the point though, huh?
November 15, 2025
The idea of secret agents and spies told from a Cold War era KGB officer sounded really interesting. But, as the author says, it isn't as exciting as movies make it out to be. The big difference is they didn't have Russians pretending to be Americans to spy. The espionage world was less about infiltration than turning members of the opposing intelligence agency to leak information. It definitely makes you trust the government less than you previously would have.
September 10, 2017
Being that I didn't know anything about the subject, Victor Cherkashin, going into this book I found that I was slowly drawn into his ploys and exploits taking place over 30 years international espionage. This book was sufficiently detailed and vague, broad and deep, to keep a mildly interested person like myself turning the pages.
August 10, 2018
Great first hand insight into the world of intelligence collection and how it related to politics late in the Cold War. Cherkashin admits that his role in it all wasn’t as exciting as a James Bond movie, but still provides insight that keeps the reader interested in how history played out from a spy’s point of view
January 28, 2019
An interesting perspective. I read Milt Bearden's book first. While the two followed pretty closely, this gave a different perspective as well as some interesting insights from an insider during the breakup of the Soviet Union. The author did a good job of being thorough without being tedious. While it was not a Tom Clancy novel, it was interesting and writing as a story, not a documentary.
July 9, 2025
3.5 stars; there were some parts I had a very hard time following as there are lots of names, acronyms, and relationships to keep track of. An interesting read, though, especially to learn more about why some people decide to spy for other countries and what, at the end of the day, much of a nations’s intelligence and counterintelligence accomplish.
March 4, 2021
Interesting memoir that touches on a lot of compelling aspects of KGB counterintelligence, particularly in the twilight of the Soviet Empire. The writing, however, was a bit dull and the narrative was a bit discombobulated.
April 11, 2021
The other side of the story
Read the other side of the Cold War story from the perspective of a professional intelligence professional. Gain insight into our mutual strengths and failures.
Read the other side of the Cold War story from the perspective of a professional intelligence professional. Gain insight into our mutual strengths and failures.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews