thank you so much. it is so gratifying for someone like me to be in this position. it is amazing. i think that i have to make a few phone calls now. thank you guys. thank you. it's amazing. thank you. >> congratulations to all of tonight finalists and to our winners. it is so wonderful to see your joy this evening. the kirkus prize would not exist without the owners of the kirkus reviews. thank you for your unwavering support and generosity. i would also like to thank the judges and the staff and editors especially the incomparable vice president of marketing who made all the object happened tonight with michelle. brilliant and very hard-working editor and chief and our production team.

thank you also to the austin public library for sharing this beautiful space with us. thank you for joining. we will see you next year. good night. >> book tb continues now. television, for serious readers. >> welcome to this event. my name is charles. i direct programs on counterterrorism. today's event marks the release of an excellent new book by my colleague douglas london. aaron tired graded 34 year veteran of the agency. his extensive experience as an intelligence agent includes multiple fields assignments at cia chief of station as well as director of national intelligence representative and the president senior intelligence representative. thirty-four years of service. traveling and working extensively across the middlehe

east, africa, alpine ventral asia. a subject on iran weapons and massive destruction. doug's book, spying and the lost art of american intelligence is a fascinating memoir for someone who spent years as an officer recruiting and managing agent both before and after 9/11. providing a unite insight to that, they are extremely important windows into the cia's evolution and what he sees as a politicized nation of the intelligence community since 9/11. there critiquee of positive negative impacts and strategy has many stories of recruiting and managing agents that reveal so much in the vital importance even in today's high-tech world of human intelligence, at least that was one of my big takeaways today's event will be moderated

and managed by the wall street journal national securityri correspondence. nancy will engage doug and perhaps at times myself and roughly 30 minutes a discussion about this new book as well as the state of intelligence and espionage and u.s. security specialty. depending on what we have covered up until that point, i may end up imposing questions of my own before transitioning over into taking questions from you, our audience today. all of thosy on zoom, please feel free to post your questions at any time throughout today's event using the chat function. and those on youtube, you cannt e-mail your questions. nancy will be keeping the questions as they come in and will no doubt make the most of them as the discussion unfolds. without further ado, let me pass over to nancy to get things started. thank you so much for much.

such a pleasure to be here. thank you for letting me be a part of it. he wrote this book with conversation. have you engage in that conversation. >> you know, really enjoyed reading your book in one of the things that struck me is how much and in what detail you described living a secret life. you sneak out in the middle of the night, you have different jobs to identify your self. you are working for an agency that discourages you identifying yourself. you have done so when you have done so in such a great fashion bby writing this book. what is it like to kind of live openly and identify your self?

what may come out this way? >> thank you, charles. probably the quickest one word description on it. police officers spend their entire life and an operational form one way or another. the jobs and services you are targeting folks for recruitment. you just call and say i am doing my kids event at school. i don't know how people do this, it does not work that way. everything about your life is actually considered and delivered. pickingou up your kids school, whatever it is that you are doing. you spend e your time doing tha. it is delivered in a way to

appear normal and spontaneous. you want to live in the shadows where you don't want to get caught and you can develop that movement becoming wise to it so you can protect them. we have his transition where it is just the opposite. my kids were in high school. living on facebook. so i said, i tried, to make that quick transition was obviously changing. making you physically comfortable at first. i said to one friend just recently, i do not really know if itt wasn't the end of june just because for the departure that it takes. there is something that i have to deal. in fact, i still am trying to figure out what that means as a

conversation of that issue. my concern about security and protecting methods with my colleagues, i actually set out to write a novel. maybe i can write a novel that tells a story. the consequences for the politicalization. antidote after an adult. it is intelligence. that is the human and you and the dynamic between the people and the risks that they are taking.ks every agent has a back story. they have hopes and dreams. they are out there doing what they can for those dreams and

hopes to get them to contribute to american security. at the same time for their protection. what transpired over the 20 years of 9/11 was a real change in cia. change in the culture, change in the mission field not one for the better. we have lost a lot of ground is we are adversaries. enhancing their capacity to correct this themselves. disinformation campaigns that we see. china, iran. the capabilities felt much much better. we were losing operations. i thought that that was because of the shift in our culture after 9/11 made us more which gave less value to our ideals and credibility as the service

that would provide the best. providing ways for decision-makers to make the right choices. we were really just perfecting in which we did extremely well. that took us away from investment and operations and traditional espionage. i learned to get a conversation going and i thought the best way that i could do it with the expertise that i thought would be unique would be telling stories. telling stories that made a difference to americans into our sick purity and perhaps the transition from the story after 9/11. my engagementrt with my headquarters colleagues and the ships thereafter. >> you described those as being interested or interesting. getting into some of those characters. i want to talk a little bit further aboutme something you jt agenda about some of the changes and how a you thought that they were detrimental.

a lot of the changes by 9/11. one thing for me is, you know, the u.s. failed to prevent 9/11. a place that did not stop that. i am wondering if you can tell me what changes you felt needed to be made that were not and what changes in particular that you think did more harm than we were intending.in >> having lived through it for the 9/11 commission report, a lot from the 9/11 reports. a very useful document. transparency. a great deal of detail. there were some things available they have been ringing the alarm bells. they were really paying attention to it.

something e got them to strike e homeland. throughout the year, it was definitely an attack. it would be a large-scale complex attack. there was a time where they did not have that with other intelligence agencies. particularly fbi, black reports with the military in some places there capabilities. i think that some of that has to do with the lifestyle which is vital that the compartmentalization exceeded the value. at the time, i think that there were some senior officers. they wanted the opportunity. they knew that something was

coming. the hijackers and the pentagon, it should have been watched. they had the fbi and had they known that they had a whole lot of what if's. the commission reporter, getting more agency communication. more dialogue, more sharing, more transparency among the players. i think that that certainly helpeded. the cia, if there is a threat report, make sure that if there is an american evolved, all of those components, those pieces all seem to be working. on the negative side was that the politics at the time, 9/11 and of course after iraq, the

national intelligence estimate, the administration used it to justify their action. the politicalization, a two way street. the agencies party was about survival. emphasizing 20 years later. we were going to be done away with it. we would be put under the fbi. particularly slighted and embarrassed that the agency of these were not able. the management and the authorities. we would see a leadership with the cia at the time. so driven.

they had to find some way to get the white house on their side to protect themselves and to do that on the transition in the way we described the book. the culture of being first and foremost and analytics service and independent somewhat nonpolitical entities for the covid action considering deniable. covert as opposed to hitting. basically found its way to taking care of difficult situations. addressing all of the detainees. not necessarily those that could be prosecuted under law. transitioning to the interrogation group. many of these things came from

the top. they are outsourced to contractors. they came up with the program. by doing so, there is a cultural shift where there is a sense which i thought early on in the agency, this inclusion to speak to the power. referring to. the officers by rank or chief. to be fair, that allowed people toto have these points of views. when you're talking about life and death, you need to be exhausted. you need to be sure and tprotected. you are also protecting your staff. because of that radical

transformation in the agency. it only seemed to replicate as we began to prioritize activity and military activity which allowed for a more rapid advancement. those who are focused on tryingd those that were part of the completion. the ones continuing to advance from agency policy. the less than traditional. much of our analysis was to support that operation. those are the negative as opposed to the greater transparency. the most fundamental problem since 9/11 was beginning to look at itself. i'm not talking about sharing with the public the rare details. something goes downhill. it is doing it internally.

now trying to protect themselves agents would be lost. in 2009, several of my colleagues killed by a very talented targeted analysis. making operation decisions. those put in charge of all of this. no one suffered the consequences nor 9/11. the number of agents that had blocked the number of casualties that we had suffered every day. perhaps in some cases the operations which were not unique and not even complementary. we did it because we wanted to. we wanted to get the resources and the attention. be met talking about some of the

areas, butou before we do, there was that sort of tension. the officer found himself or herself between two worlds. the bureaucracy and the challenges of the agency and the very world that they are operating in trying to find agents to work with them. the couple of people that you describe, i should practice the agency as you describe it, very thoroughly to keep our intelligence, look for the agency. there are couple people that described, you gave them pseudo- names. one just stood out to me. his love of family. a couple of people that really seem to be stuck. happening to find this.

i wanted to know if you could talk about that. tell me if i'm reading it correctly, he found himself in between these two worlds. if you can talk a little bit about it if you feel comfortable. how that case ended because of that conflict between what the agency wanted and what them on the ground wanted to have coming forward. >> it was turned over to another officer. >> yes, that was him. so, the job of the police officer was managing risks. explain to us, what did i do for three-five years. the challenges with the police officer and the culture change in terms of how they manage was

really where the tensions grew the most. so, ideally, researchers controlling what we can and cannot control. as i talk about in the book, more geared towards politics. if it was on the front page of a newspaper. isis the risk to secure intelligence worth it to both the agency and the collector and what have you. he was, you know, developing counterterrorism . >> wondering how you came across him? >> i have, actually. a very difficult area.

in fact people with the civil war. there was no family there. but we still have some of our houses. our official platform to make it harder foror the local service o keep an eye on us. having some connectivity with the agent. people are desperate. these arees hard times in this country. coming to investigate. catching the perpetrators. their concern is blasting everyone. making them weak to their own countrymen in the united states government. intrusion into their authority. what is going on, can i help. they hady their insurance team look into it. i thought what a great opportunity. we shared the target.

trying to find these units. finding out what their capabilities and intelligence work. that's what we needed to protect ourselves. maintaining the image not to maintain. i was very naïve. also worried about my security. coming after me. listening to a investigators. he of course reassured me that it was fine. he had to stay hidden in the local language. he was, to be fair, his job was

finding terrorists and making them go away. he was thrilled. thank you for all of this. taking a look. he was more than happy to do that. separation from the herd, if you would. kind of the relationship with me i don't want anybody moonlighting. we became best friends through all of this. the time came.

no matter what, you eventually start using your cover. you will start becoming well interest. people forget that we were about the russian and the chinese. very interested in what we are doing. >> harold was very much a corporate god. a great description. how it was at the tradecraft. engaging with people across all cultural changes and divides.

any structure in any outlook. people that are more suburban, privileged. urmohammed felt disrespected. that was a big deal. carrying records all the time. here is this kind of, you know, suburbia and sort of privileged american disrespecting me. showing up at my house. handling and agent against me. the other problem is heavily

intoxicated. >> mohamed should have, no? >> yeah. he did not show up at my house. you know, through the company, making comments of these terrible things. sort of easing in with his hands. trying to find a way to deal with this. how that jeopardize the work that we had, throwing a lot more money and work at mohammed.

he had done nothing wrong. in fact, mohammed disappeared towards the end of vacation. he was going to go away. about a l year or so later thate found out mohammed reached out to us throughout the communication, he was shot. a terrace stakeout. he was, you know, badly shot out he was disabled and could no d longer work. we did give him a nice settlement i. even at the end, mohammed was very thankful. never really had much to say about harold. you know, indeed, it is very

possible that mohammed would have quit, somehow not seeing me for who i am. not appreciating what i'm contributing towards your country and mine. you have to be in a world where celebrate this no judgment zone. i think it is really transitioned as an agency. not really recruiting a more diverse road of police officers, particularly in my country let alone the differences around the world. the coming less and less of a priority focusing on military operation. i think that it was unfortunate who then influence their handler how much weight to human intelligence.

>> i think one thing people might find surprising, people had to have details cut out. how many interactions you have with people convinced to work with you without being there friends. sort of meeting people that you are empathetic towards. an author who speaks is in a dangerous position. willing to take the risk because he does not want to be home late to hisoe wife. wanting to do the right thing and start giving more and more into the al qaeda network. does not know how to extricate himself, in a way. driven by his love of family and and the reason to do something right. the agency providing intelligence and all of these interactions that you have and even your family has as part of

this effort to recruit agents that can provide the united states with key intelligence. i was really struck by how many stories, the interchange of personalities are on the polar opposite of interest. one current event which is afghanistan. we've been talking a lot about this in the recent weeks and months. i wonder, given what we have talked about in terms of the evolution of the agency, did they collect human intelligence andon the way that that information has been shared throughout the united states government, agencies become like the narrative. where does the success and the failures of afghanistan, why do you think that the u.s. struggled to understand the

depths of the taliban. and the state that we now find ourselves in. >> is out for charles or for me? >> that is for you. listening for some time now. you know, interesting comments. it is politically convenient. not a fair reflection of the intelligence reporting on afghanistan. the cia was consistently much better off about what was going on in afghanistan. much more critical about the stability. the cohesiveness, the national military persons, the police ans army. that is one of the benefits about being in an organization.

getting too far down that road. not criticizing our own work. we are there to inform the decision-makers on what we see going on. i will give a shout out for his book on the afghanistan papers, the military taking a much more easy picture. what are the briefings with general officers. just around the corner. t doing so much better this year than last year. they were responsible. events on the ground training the national army. reinforcing. they were having success. all about metrics. the issues carried out in operations. that is how you will transform a country. unfortunately, i think that it

was the u.s. policy. disrupting each operation which we did. we actually went there and what we accomplished. to them, trying to take an american model which is absolutely ready for that. having to even suffer that. that is our motto, not theirs. taking part in the white house, making progress. i would send our prefers to the pentagon. this iswa why we need to find another way to deal with afghanistan. how can we use better kinetics. i just do not think american eypolicymakers want to hear it.

they want to believe that they mwill be successful. our military counterparts. over a training program. an intelligence service. military missions. we were dealing on a fair scalec with operation. we did it and we did it well. none of the afghan troops we have are trained fired upon us. the military suffered a great number. it was sort of a much more culturally historic model on what would be more work. i think the military is tfantastic at what they do. they are not trained to

understand and see what the realities are on the ground. it works great for us and works great for a lot of the countries despite what we were saying. the cia had been talking about it for years and years. the trump administration advising the campaign on counterterrorism. these were conditions where they were getting the clarity for that amount of money. the taliban negotiated in good faith. looking for a new solution. our insight into the country. we said days to weeks. that h meant that dismissal of e conditions that we spoke about. not about this perspective. >> it is interesting.

all the pieces of the puzzle are there. it is such that you cannot put those pieces together. i think somehow they believe that it is boring. in which intelligence, it is as important as the corruption and intelligence it self. >> we certainly saw that and spending the intelligence and we certainly flew into afghanistan. >> i could ask you questions all day long. i have seen some from our listeners and they are really thoughtful. i will hand it over to charles. >> thank you. i will be quick. i guess that i have one question

which taxon to the afghanistan situation. one of the aspects are the consequences from the withdraw and the chaos and the instability. that has not been sufficiently acknowledged. the ability to continue to portray the united states as a reliable answer that sticks with its partners that does not pull the rug from the feet. is there something to that as someone who spent so long recruiting people. the willingness and ability no questions asked to stand by. it is something that comes up in the discussions. as part of that, something that we talked about before is human

intelligence important tent counterterrorism. the rolling getting to the deeper root causes that allow terrorismsm to exist in the firt place. i am wondering to the afghanistan question, just to broaden the importance of humans to that very long-term generation, i realize that those are two big questions. perhaps we could just get started on them at least or give us some of your ideas. >> agents do not have to like the united states government. they have to trust us. going into recruitment with terrorists after the enhanced tointerrogation. by this cia. telling someone that it was in theirwn best interest, in some cases ideological to work with

the cia and the united states. i guess their family, potentially. so many are family connections, tribal connections. that is not an issue. trying to nick that issue, one agent not long after the election decided byid the supree court, here they were, you know, i usedni to think united states was the most democratic country in the entire world. that was from a country that really did not even like india. you have to find a way to have that intimate relationship between police officer and agent it has to go beyond friendship. it has to be institutionalized. you havee to carve out that nico

they can trust that we will honor our commitments regardless of what policies there may be. particularly we have had great historic cases of russian and chinese over the years. they have to do something, they are hoping to align with u.s. policy. that is a not always the case. the second part of the question is, that is really where there is disconnect betweennn policie. policy has been so focused on what is e our easiest most efficient way to combat terrorism. the answer has been kinetic options. forced on a person. actually speaking to it in a rather eloquent way. this happens out of conditioning. issues are driving folks. t i see some conditions.

victimization. fear. hatred because terrorism occurst when those dehumanized those attacks. you no longer see them as people that happening here with white supremacists and the alternative right and all these right-wing militia where they are doing this. even federal americans have theseam ethnic group brands. intelligence who constantly said here is a the power base and hee is the tech geek, leveraging hatred, leveraging the condition, leverage the united states. supporting and enabling. that is how they get people in and that is how they transform

them. policymakers dealing with that. it is a lot harder to look at a holisticch policy. a diplomatic power. you know when you've got the best military in the world and you see combatants on the battlefield, they just keep going after them. decentralizing the threat, a bigger bench for recruits. they are more dispersed. you are doing nothing which has led people to terrorism in the first place. >> we have a question from jeffrey. a good follow-up to the point you just made. how much harder was a process of bringing in new staff, there is

thisis divisiveness. do you believe that the pill is ionization of intelligence has a negative impact on recruiting. >> i think that the cia's recent ads have been very focused on trying to improve their brand. graduate students and such. what is your retro action. it is negative. it is critical. these are educated folks. i think the cia and its problems , getting out of this very typical case, happening right now, suburban privilege individual who is well-educated and traveled on holidays and studied abroad.

does not know how people withheld from different parts of the world were dealt with adversity. they were all people. some of them were not the nicest people and they had blood on their hands. a good number of them did. i watched ron calm spirit getting out of that. part of the problem with asbackground checks has been for us, this propensity who are nationalizing citizens who may be a little bit of trouble. trouble in high school with whatever criminal activity. community college as opposed to a top 100 university. heso, i think that that is partf the problem. they will need to make adjustments. it should not be a process that

is politically biased. i think that there is a danger in that. the politicalization of that in january. i am hoping that professionals do their job. we have found in the agency where people think about the secret group of people trying to resist, people are very mission focused on their job. they are subject to various biases. bringing the right people into the community. >> asking a great follow-up question. howen do you see the agency getting closer to a more nonpartisan environment thatsa u described? among increasingly politicized and divisive environment. >> well, advancement, it should

be gifts that contribute. a point of view of different backgrounds and perspectives. i think that, i never sensed partisanship in the agency really prior to the trump administration. just never really knew what the political party people were a part of. operations are issues a being hd understanding what we are doing. kind of friction and for that to always be the same. i did see and enabling partisanship concerns with people projecting more. and hopefully not projecting the influence of what we are doing. there is no partisan involved. senior leadership for republican and democratic, republican and

democratic illustrations alike. wwhat can we say not today. the current administration and particularly in russia. the director in which they would be more different in terms of getting out and production and analysis. such a fear of the repercussions that is the most direct impact of partisanship and politics. i sought more broadly, when he worked for trump, very different very professional, very objective. try to protect himself. making it terribly hard.

the united states government. he who had gone with the fbi unfortunately on a mission. his effort to beat up on iraq. he knew that he was dead, but it was politically self serving because of h the white house interests. >> describing the trajectory one way. is there a way to put all of that back in the box? is that possible? >> what director burns is doing, who is going to appointed yard he has maneuvered out some of those. they have been there for too long and then part of the

problem. some very innovative ways without having to do this. at the same time using the ability to lead the position. he has made some very good i points. publicly recognized and a colleague and friend. a very professional case officer he will do the right thing. he wants to bring back the service and promote them in the right way. the task force. an excellent officer. he would do the right thing. the problem is, 20 years of

nurturing, one perspective. covid action. you have a lot of folks in charge of the operational transformation with very little direct experience with those kinds of operations. then, you know, where is the wind going that will favor me? that does not change overnight. deputy director decline. it will not be that easy. i think what will help agency is leadership and above. we are really reprioritizing the competition. that means that the solution will not be the answer. if they are allowed to do it, it is taken.

this is why we are having this. it is not necessarily -- >> let's talk about a couple of those. i know that we are limited on time. gh smith, how important is intelligence to the chinese? how does this relationship with politics and police differ with that of a the united states. >> the security, the military service, it is very well funded. they kind of suffer from that same politicalization. they cannot be to controlled. they traditionally have focused on operations. working with those that they

think will be sympathetic towards china. just rolling out those close relationships. sort of engaging in the person that i was speaking. what we have done, most importantly is extremely good. in some cases, not because of tech analogy, but because the way we used it was weak. compromising through some backdoor. the chinese are members in the investment. it is going to be very smart, very well conserved operation which aree. doable. we have done it before.

we can do it again. what are the plans, what are the capabilities and what are the threats? someone that you mention earlier asking how the agency and the community reacted. we felt protective, to say the least. an anonymous version. i am curious what public feedback you have gotten. what surprised you? >> the formergu colleague and wt they had spoken to. their effort. i give them props. just that my voters were disappointed that i did not know

realizing what the motives have been. not aligned with intelligence. the vindication or telling the story or technology. those thatti are criticizing tht way are those that benefited. some of whom to whom they exercise contracts. those that have been supportive are those that are senior officers of the past who i felt that same disappointment of what happened to the agency. they have been in the trenches fighting these wars. seeing our agents. i knew that going in. starting a conversation and getting it going. at the end of the day, those that read the book, it is a love story that you are strong.

my book is about how much we need the cia. we need the cia at its very best have to tell you, i have gotten all sorts of questions. let me get one more in, if you will indulge me. the question that i got was from manuel. he says thank you for your knowledge and experience. national security has increased and decreased service. one of the most pressing issues that you would like to be later. the future for the united states and its approach towards national security. >> that is a good question. that should be the most important question. the counterterrorism over the years..

one large directed al qaeda in afghanistan. i think we as a country have a tendency to overreact because how can you overreact. some of my children that went to school today, it must be considered in balance. the preacher that spoke at the cathedral after 9/11, i think that we just have to sort of be patient. in a way, it concerns me because there is much internal as they are external. the domestic terrorism.

i am concerned that we are straineded politically to take action thatio we need because somebody is going to be imagine. there is a lot of politics to play. the competition is serious as it always has been oo answer. a lot of the answers are covert. i think that there is a lot for people out there for recommendations. they make the right issues. it happens fast. i think the intel community knows what it needs to deal. resisting them as well. you cannot please all of the people. some people have political

connections. take a more courageous moves. i think having a bit to secure c support would be a useful step in that direction. >> we started this conversation, i can tell you from the questions that we have gotten in onthe last hour, i think that we have successfully done that. all of the people for the past 34 years, i appreciate you sharing those experiences with us. i want to thank you for allowing me to be your moderator. i think that it has been an interesting y conversation. thank you for letting us go on this journey with you. an unclassified setting, if you will. it has been really illuminating and i thank you for sharing your

experience with us. >> thank you for everyone that is tuned in and watched and is t reading it. >> thank you so much. >> thank you everyone. >> c-span online store. apparel, books, quality clothing and accessories. something for every c-span fan. shop now or any time at c-span shop.org. >> a look at some of the most notable books of 2021 according to publishers weekly. peter accounts a life of 19th century supreme court justice john marshall harlan. read until you understand. columbia university chair of the african-american and studies

department looks at the writings of black authors and public intellectuals to address this year's qualities and freedom. science writer examines a conflict between humans and wildlife in the book. under our white sky, elizabeth colburn detail some of the way science is used to counteract as well as to adapt to the effects of climate change. and brian reflects on his life and memoir punch me up to the gods. most of these authors have. on book tv. just sign the authors name in the search bar at the top of the page. ♪♪ >> sunday, january 2 on in-depth. historian joins us live to talk about the intellectual history of the united states. civil war and the reconstruction area. redeeming rate of emancipated or. his latest robert e lee