‘Hubris’ impressive, worth reading
The newsmaking book “Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror” shows off a red, white and blue cover, representing a U.S. flag slightly ragged at the edges.
At the bottom is the red portion, with the author’s name in large type: Anonymous.
The dust jacket says Anonymous “is a senior U.S. intelligence official with nearly two decades of experience in national security issues related to Afghanistan and South Asia.” He is the author, previously, of “Through Our Enemies’ Eyes: Osama bin Laden, Radical Islam and the Future of America.”
Inside the book, another sentence explains that as in “Through Our Enemies’ Eyes,” the name Anonymous is used “as the condition for securing his employer’s permission to publish …”
That explanation is not nearly complete or good enough. Everybody involved — the Central Intelligence Agency, the publisher, journalists writing about the revelations — ought to be spanked for subverting democracy.
Before I explain why, let me make sure the considerable substance of “Imperial Hubris” is not slighted, because the book is worth buying, then reading carefully.
The author offers impressive factual, contextual and emotional information as debate continues about whether George W. Bush or John Kerry ought to be elected; whether Congress needs to intervene more decisively in policymaking for locales such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Palestine and Israel; whether the use of U.S. military force is being handled wisely; and whether more women and men will die on U.S. soil in ways similar to and different from Sept. 11.
Anonymous explains why he believes the U.S. government and its citizenry must halt their dependence on Middle East oil supplies and the immoral government-religious nexus controlling those supplies; why bin Laden and other Islamic leaders should not be viewed primarily as criminal terrorists but rather as sincere (albeit violent) insurgents; why U.S. policymakers must employ military force more effectively or withdraw from the role of global police officer; and much more.
His opinions are based partly on information classified as secret and therefore unavailable to most readers, but “Imperial Hubris” is grounded in unclassified information as a condition of publication. Unclassified information, when stitched together wisely, can reveal much. That leads Anonymous to comment: “Given that these easy-to-reach conclusions can be drawn from materials found in the public library and on the Internet, Americans should wonder why their political, intelligence, military and media leaders have not made them.”
Anonymous possesses the courage to speak out in ways that other insiders have dodged. Somehow, he and his publisher substantially prevailed against the CIA censorship culture to bring “Imperial Hubris” to market. Hooray for all that.
Still, the ignorance among readers about the author’s true identity is a serious problem. Without knowing his real name; his education (including knowledge of Arabic, if any); his professional experience (for example, desk work in Langley, Va., or first-hand observation in Baghdad, Iraq) and his workplace history (satisfied content analyst or oft-disciplined malcontent seeking to settle scores?), his motives are impossible to discern. And when a book such as “Imperial Hubris” exists, motive underlies everything.Why did so many journalists write news accounts and reviews about “Imperial Hubris” without publishing the author’s name? He certainly provides enough clues that a persistent investigator could have pieced together the puzzle.
In fact, that is what happened: The staff of the Boston Phoenix, a weekly newspaper in Massachusetts, disclosed the author as Michael Scheuer, a native of Buffalo, N.Y., a Republican, a first-generation college graduate, holder of a doctorate in British imperial history from the University of Manitoba — and a CIA recruit based on a newspaper advertisement.