SPY STORY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00587R000100720037-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 18, 2011
• Sequence Number: 37
• Publication Date: August 20, 1985
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/02/18: CIA-RDP91-00587R000100720037-4
TRENTONIAN ( TRENTON,NJ)
20 August 1985
Spy Story
Arkady Shevchenko's "true-life
spy story" sounds like cloak-and-dag-
ger best-seller fiction - and there are
those who now say that's just what it
mostly is: fiction.
Shevchenko's
best-seller,
Breaking With
Moscow, is a riv-
eting account of
how he was a
spy for the CIA
while serving
with the Soviet's
U.N. delegation.
The book, to
which movie
rights have been
bought, also
gives a dramatic, detccount of
Shevchenko's 1978 defection.
But now, critics are suggesting the
book should be listed under fiction -
not non-fiction. The most specific
challenge to the book comes from
Edward J. Epstein in a recent The
New Republic article.
On a host of points involving dates
and other varifiable information,
Epstein finds Shevchenko's story
sorely lacking in credibility. Epstein
finds no evidence of the speeding
ticket Shevchencko tells of receiving
in the New York suburbs during a
dramatic chase scene.
He finds an account of a dinner
with a KGB official in New York
when the official actually at that time
was in Moscow and no longer as-
signed to New York.
He finds "cinematic" details, such
as long, revealing, verbatim-quoted
talks with Khruschchev, that were
not in manuscripts submitted to and
rejected by other publishers.
Shevchenko finally called a press
conference and denounced the
criticism as "ridiculous" and "ter-
roristic journalism." But his denial,
while vocal, was extremely vague -
in contrast to the very specific
criticism.
There have been published reports
that Shevchenko received literary
help from the CIA. What is disturb-
ing about this controversy is not that
one more writer may have "hyped"
the truth to "juice up" sales.
What is disturbing is the suspicion
that the CIA may have had a hand in
a bit of a public relations flimflam to
boost its image among Americans.
The CIA is paid to play the other side
for suckers, not us.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/02/18: CIA-RDP91-00587R000100720037-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/02/18: CIA-RDP91-00587R000100720037-4
TRENTONIAN ( TRENTON,NJ)
20 August 1985
Spy Story
Arkady Shevchenko's "true-life
spy story" sounds like cloak-and-dag-
ger best-seller fiction - and there are
those who now say that's just what it
mostly is: fiction.
Shevchenko's
best-seller,
Breaking With
Moscow, is a riv-
eting account of
how he was a
spy for the CIA
while serving
with the Soviet's
U.N. delegation.
The book, to
which movie
rights have been
bought, also
gives a dramatic, detailed account of
Shevchenko's 1978 defection.
But now, critics are suggesting the
book should be listed under fiction -
not non-fiction. The most specific
challenge to the book comes from
Edward J. Epstein in a recent The
New Republic article.
On a host of points involving dates
and other varifiable information,
Epstein finds Shevchenko's story
sorely lacking in credibility. Epstein
fords no evidence of the speeding
ticket Shevchencko tells of receiving
in the New York suburbs durin* a
dramatic chase scene.
He finds an account of a dinner
with a KGB official in New York
when the official actually at that tune
was in Moscow and no longer its-
signed to New York.
He finds "cinematic" details, such
as long, revealing, verbatim-quoted
talks with Khruschchev, that were
not in manuscripts submitted to and
rejected by other publishers.
Shevchenko finally called a press
conference and denounced the
criticism as "ridiculous" and "ter-
roristic journalism." But his denial,
while vocal, was extremely vague -
in contrast to the very specific
criticism.
There have been published reports
that Shevchenko received literary
help from the CIA. What is disturb-
ing about this coo t
oroversy is not that
one more writer may have "hyped"
the truth to "juice up" sales.
What is disturbing is the suspicion
that the CIA may have had a hand in
a bit of a public relations flimflam- to
boost its image among Americans.
The CIA is paid to play the other side
for suckers, not us.
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/02/18: CIA-RDP91-00587R000100720037-4