The Soviet Biological Weapons Program: A History

Recently published by Harvard Press, this is an exhaustive 922-page book that details Soviet and Russian biological warfare efforts. So far it appears ridiculously well researched, with the authors digging deep within Russian source material, interviewing individuals directly involved with the programs, and referencing various intelligence reports to uncover a whole mess of previously undisclosed information. An idea of how in-depth it gets is illustrated by a detailed examination of the security classification and reporting systems used in relation to biological warfare projects and establishments. To their credit, the authors also manage to get very specific with the individual programs without relying too much on clinical terminology, making it accessible to people outside of the medical field (like me, so that's good).

One of the best parts is a chapter dedicated solely to examining how Western intelligence agencies got things both right (sometimes) and wrong (way more than they'd likely admit) about the program.

Very, very interesting. It's not small and it'll take a good long time to read through everything, but as of now this is by far the most impressive book I've gotten this year.

There was another book written by Ken Alibek (spelling) who was a defector in the 90s.

Like to read such books, but get the feeling that such information should not be published... I am sure American government officials feel the same about Wikileaks...

I always look at books by defectors with a critical eye.

This book sounds very interesting though, thanks for heads up Sean.

Alibekov's book, Biohazard, was actually very good if limited in scope to things he dealt with in Biopreparat. Sure he was a "defector", but it was a bit of an interesting situation the way he writes it given how it all went down after the fall of the USSR (how his situation went down, that is). Plus, hsi attitude never really seemed to be "I want life in excess in the West", more of "I'm a doctor WTF am I doing, and this bureacracy is just asinine." Certainly wasn't what I expected, I'd definitely suggest that one as well.

As for not being published...I doubt you're going to be able to build a bioweapon from reading either book, but it certainly does highlight how the USSR completely ignored the Bioweapons treaty. Of that there is most certainly no doubt.

And regarding Wikileaks...my only argument there, as with any publication that does the same, is that they're knowingly and willingly participating in a felony. The Army guy deserves everything he gets for violating the non-disclosure agreement he signed. Doesn't mean I don't read such things, or even understand the "why" in some cases, but it does mean that, given my own experience with such security regulations, I have zero sympathy when the leakers get caught.

Without Wikileaks we never would have seen the hilarious "intel" that Stratfor gathers .

TR1 wrote:Without Wikileaks we never would have seen the hilarious "intel" that Stratfor gathers .

I knew people when I was in the USAF who swore by STRATFOR, and they were in the same job I was! Sometimes I think I'm surrounded by more intelligence sitting alone in my kitchen then I was in the USAF Wasn't all bad though, for every self-appointed genius I ran across there were a number of people who had the two best traits of an intel analyst: they knew who had the best stuff for a given subject, and they knew when to say they didn't know the answer to a question. Some of the best analysts I worked with were the Army and Marine guys in Baghdad, they certainly knew their stuff.

And regarding Wikileaks...my only argument there, as with any publication that does the same, is that they're knowingly and willingly participating in a felony.

If wikileaks is guilty of anything it is publishing material also published by the Guardian in the UK and that Washington newspaper. It seems however that only one australian is getting it in the neck for it.

BTW when was the last time you had sex without a condom?

Don't need to answer that, but in some countries it is also a felony to decide not to wear one after being asked to do so by your partner... even if the activities are total consensual it is technically rape.

In the case of Wikileaks the US proclaims truth and justice are the American way, and B!tch constantly about a lack of transparency in Russian government... as far as I am concerned I am surprised more Americans haven't stepped up and said US government are criminals and liars and in every sense of the ideology are the real traitors in this case.

The claims by Hilary that it is necessary for the US to lie in diplomacy clearly puts any accusations of the Soviets cheating on treaties.

The Army guy deserves everything he gets for violating the non-disclosure agreement he signed.

I am sure the purpose of that declaration was not to hide corruption and abuses of power within the government.

If his releases of information end up resulting in a better US government then that is a good thing for the US.

The problem is that the US government doesn't want truth and justice... lies and revenge are easier and a good use for its bloated MIC, so anyone who tries to make the system better will be scapegoated.

I knew people when I was in the USAF who swore by STRATFOR,

Hey, someone has to put the Oxymoron in Military Intelligence...

SOC wrote: book, but it certainly does highlight how the USSR completely ignored the Bioweapons treaty.  Of that there is most certainly no doubt.

Same is the case with US now they blatantly ignore Biological weapons treaty and moreover they have been testing different strains of viruses in foreign countries like South Korea and Georgia.