Book Review : - LETHAL SECRETS

“Head shots are personal”. They are about revenge and leveling scores. And then “the shooter returned along the cow path, moving casually, without the slightest hurry”.

Pete Earley has given his best shot at immortalizing Vladimir Mikhailovich Khrenkov; in literary parlance; and has arguably succeeded. The likes of Connor Fitzgerald have been matched by the unflinching sharpshooter. I really love snipers in stories and Khrenkov is no exception.

Secret Service agencies have for long been interesting writing. But Pete goes one step further by portraying the intel quagmire of America’s cluttered anti-terrorism mechanism.

The starkness of contrasting America and Russia as free world vis-à-vis reeking Communist is passé but has been employed with clarity by this former Washington post reporter. America’s cold war precautions are oft publicized and in America it was a way of spreading word that the nation was one up in providing its rulers safety and immunity from the tirade of nuclear war. But I am pretty sure that Russians too had in place mechanisms worth comparison or even more. But the secrets are still in safe hands. There have been no media leaks or unwitting publicity stunts. Guess who is victor!

Back to ‘lethal secrets’ a mish-mash of American, Russian and Chechen realities and biases! Moe the viper is an analogy of the existing warlords in Chechnya, sure. His transformation from being a bright philosophical student to the cold-blooded fighter was accentuated by Russian atrocities. When have occupying forces been benefactors?

The book is not mute when it points out that the quest for oil has made villains out of Russia as well as America. I found undercurrent thoughts suggesting that America is not the sole super-power since Russia still clings on though with a disheveled mechanism. Russia still holds sway in American policy decisions towards the former Soviet bloc nations partly because of America’s unwanted adventurisms elsewhere.

Holding America hostage to nuclear havoc and the way the bomb is disposed all count for mere sensationalism. They are not the vital issues for me. But the plight of nations at constant war, big bossedness of militarily powerful nations, gross human rights violations etc are.

In the book individual rivalries and disagreements within the forces and the goodwill between people are at times the issues. Even a bit of sex and harassment finds space in the pages. But I still feel a dearth of research when compared to my favourite, that being Crichton. I would disagree with ‘Pete Earley’s eye for detail’ as suggested by Mike Segar.

Wyatt Conway shall soon be forgotten, so shall be Kimberly Lodge. It is only Khrenkov and Moe who will call the shots in the end. Both are real survivors and I found in them certain integrity of character. I give the book a 3 on 5. That would translate into ‘readable’.