A new book by a sitting CIA officer is creating a firestorm even as the substance of its revelations remains murky. Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror is the latest book to criticize the government's policies in the post—9/11 world. Only this time, there's a twist: the author is in the unusual position of continuing to serve in the CIA and, unlike the high-profile name branding that happened with Richard Clarke and others, he remains anonymous.
"The government makes a dominant case that we're hated because of our freedoms, not because of our policies," said Christina Davidson, the title's editor. This book, she said, "challenges that gospel." The book, from the small Virginia publisher Brassey's Inc, will come out in early July. Because of the interest, the house said it has already raised its print run from 20,000 to 30,000—4o,000 copies.
The attention began after a piece ran in London's Guardian early last week. Soon the author was being interviewed on everything from Wolf Blitzer to the network evening news programs to NPR, all over the period of a few days. The timing was not accidental: after disappointing sales for a previous title by the author, the house decided this time to pitch the book to the U.K. media. "We gambled that Americans don't like being scooped by the Brits," said marketing director Sam Dorrance. Sure enough, after the piece ran, the American media followed, with the author always appearing in shadow.
The question of anonymity remains a dicey one for the publisher. While the house is concerned about even revealing that the author works for the CIA, government insiders said his role has been known for some time. The author's name is, as one source said, one of the "best-kept secrets" in Washington, and CIA co-workers are aware of his identity as well. His job has reportedly changed since his first book, Through Our Enemies' Eyes, was published in 2002. Dorrance said the house is committed to protecting his identity, but acknowledged this may not be fully in their control. "If someone did their homework, they could put two and two together," he said.
