Book SummaryFarewell, by Sergei Kostin and Eric Raynaud

1-Page Summary1-Page Book Summary of Farewell

Vetrov's personal background and psychological characteristics.

Vetrov grew up in a modest environment where strong familial bonds fostered within him a profound distaste for social injustices.

Vladimir Vetrov grew up in humble surroundings, surrounded by a family that deeply cherished one another. Born in 1932, Vetrov was raised in the Russian capital, residing in a shared living space typical of the Soviet period, where several families cohabitated. Vetrov, an only child who came of age in the 1930s and 40s, received profound affection and attention from his mother Maria, as well as his father Ippolit. His ethical growth was strengthened by strong family ties, shielding him from the common delinquencies among the youth that were frequent in the post-war period.

Kostin and Raynaud further highlight how Vetrov's educational experiences illuminated the stark contrasts within Soviet society, which played a significant role in deepening his discontent. Vetrov witnessed firsthand the advantages that elite children enjoyed in a school that educated both working-class children and those hailing from families with influential status. Teachers preferred students with influential parents, granting them opportunities that were not available to everyone, a situation that left Vetrov feeling deeply hurt and instilled in him a strong belief that he was unfairly denied what he deserved.

Context

• The period following World War II in the Soviet Union was marked by significant social and economic challenges, including housing shortages and rationing, which influenced the upbringing of children during this time.
• Soviet propaganda emphasized the fight against social injustice and the creation of a classless society, which could intensify feelings of betrayal or disillusionment when individuals observed the opposite in practice.
• Living in such close quarters often led to a lack of privacy and could create tension among families. However, it also encouraged a strong sense of community and mutual support, as neighbors had to cooperate and share resources.
• The focus on a single child might have allowed for more personalized educational and moral guidance, which could be crucial in shaping Vetrov's ethical perspectives and responses to social injustices.
• Common issues among youth included petty theft, vandalism, and truancy, often exacerbated by the lack of recreational facilities and structured activities for young people.
• Admission to prestigious universities was often influenced by a student's social background and connections, which could limit opportunities for those from less privileged families.
• Children from influential families often had greater exposure to cultural and intellectual activities, which could enhance their educational experiences and outcomes compared to their peers.
• Experiencing favoritism and inequality at a young age can have lasting psychological effects, potentially fostering a sense of alienation or disillusionment with societal structures.

Vetrov's success in sports and academic endeavors showcased his determination and tenacity.

Vetrov's considerable determination and aspirations were apparent from his initial successes in scholarly pursuits and sports. During his formative years, Vetrov excelled in athletics, securing titles as a young champion in the 100-, 200-, and 400-meter sprints throughout the Soviet Union. His sense of accomplishment and pride was bolstered by his triumphs in athletic competitions. He was regarded as a potential Olympian, relishing the respect and privileges bestowed upon sportspeople in the Soviet Union.

Kostin and Raynaud characterize Vetrov's academic achievements as exceptional. He gained admission to the prestigious Moscow-based technical school, which is frequently compared to MIT, even though he encountered significant opposition and did not have influential supporters. Vetrov stood at the forefront of pioneering early computing machinery and instruments, laying the groundwork for modern computer technology, thanks to his expertise in the field of electronic engineering. Vetrov demonstrated an inherent skill and a steadfast resolve to achieve success.

Context

• The 100-, 200-, and 400-meter sprints are track events that test an athlete's speed and endurance, with the 100 meters being a straight sprint, while the 200 and 400 meters require running on a curved track.
• The state heavily invested in sports programs, and athletes were often provided with financial support, making a career in sports a viable and prestigious path.
• The technical school in Moscow is likely the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT) or Bauman Moscow State Technical University, both renowned for their rigorous programs and contributions to science and engineering.
• The Soviet Union developed its own line of computers, such as the BESM and the Minsk series, which were used for scientific research and military applications. Pioneers in this field contributed to these advancements, often working under challenging conditions due to limited resources and political pressures.
• Being considered a potential Olympian in the Soviet Union was a significant honor, as the country invested heavily in its athletes to demonstrate superiority on the world stage. This underscores the level of Vetrov's athletic talent and the high expectations placed upon him.

Internal Conflicts

Vetrov's growing disenchantment with the KGB was driven by his resentment towards the deep-seated favoritism within its ranks.

Vetrov began working for the KGB in 1959, initially brimming with enthusiasm, yet as time passed, this enthusiasm waned, leading to a growing desire for vengeance. Lured by the allure of prestige and the seemingly thrilling opportunities offered by the KGB, Vetrov soon recognized that his ambitions were being thwarted by the prevalent nepotism and corruption within the agency.

Vetrov...

Farewell Summary Vetrov's growing disenchantment regarding the KGB, coupled with internal strife, led him to commit acts of espionage.

Professional Setbacks

Vetrov's descent into betrayal stemmed from a series of professional setbacks that deepened his resentment and fueled his pursuit of vengeance. Vetrov's disillusionment with the KGB intensified, prompting him to adopt a more critical stance towards its leadership, whom he saw as both corrupt and inept, especially as his own professional progression was repeatedly ignored. This marginalization, along with not being acknowledged for his achievements, intensified his feelings of unfairness.

Vetrov became increasingly discontented due to the lack of recognition and advancement he felt was due for his efforts within the KGB.

Kostin and Raynaud emphasize that Vetrov's growing dissatisfaction stemmed from the consistent refusal of the KGB to acknowledge his work with the promotions and honors he expected. Vetrov's sense of injustice deepened as he observed less capable colleagues progressing in their careers due to their influential networks, which further solidified his intense perception of inequity within the agency. The writers suggest that the challenges he faced during his career were the critical elements that led him to turn against the KGB.

...

Farewell Summary The wider global repercussions stemmed from the initiative referred to as Farewell.

The participation of the French Directorate for Security and Intelligence.

Kostin and Raynaud provide a detailed account of how the DST's involvement in the Farewell operation caught many by surprise, highlighting the unorthodox tactics employed and the critical roles played by the courageous individuals who took part in this risky mission. Vetrov deliberately chose the DST, an intelligence agency that was not as closely monitored, because it suited his requirements for security and his awareness of the extensive penetration the KGB had within the more well-known agencies. The authors highlight the pivotal involvement of Jacques Prevost, an executive at Thomson-CSF, who also served as a link for DST, in carrying out this clandestine operation in Moscow.

Vetrov deliberately chose the unremarkable and unnoticed Directorate of Territorial Surveillance for his disloyal activities, emphasizing his commitment to maintaining confidentiality.

Vetrov intentionally disclosed his information to the DST, a French intelligence agency recognized for its prudence, driven by his pursuit of security.

Vetrov believed that his act of treachery would be safer if carried out under the...

Farewell Summary After the Farewell affair concluded, Vetrov was captured, subjected to a legal proceeding, and ultimately met his demise through capital punishment.

The collapse of Vetrov.

Kostin and Raynaud deliver an engaging account that emphasizes Vetrov's proficiency in subterfuge and his inclination towards decisions that precipitated his downfall. Vetrov's choice led to his undoing, which originated from profound internal struggles and a pressing need to tackle his issues. The story explores the sequence of events leading to his apprehension, outlining the slow and mistake-filled approach employed by the KGB to uncover his espionage activities, and it further clarifies how the French Security Service's action to expel 47 Soviet diplomats inadvertently played a role in solidifying his fate.

Vetrov's killing of Krivich and the subsequent attack on Ludmila led to his apprehension, which in turn revealed his clandestine activities as a spy.

Kostin and Raynaud chronicle the onset of Vetrov's downfall, which began on the 22nd of February, 1982. Overwhelmed by escalating paranoia and pushed to the edge by his chaotic relationship with Ludmila, Vetrov violently took the life of Yuri Krivich, an innocent bystander, and also turned his deadly aggression towards Ludmila. The unexpectedly aggressive behavior of the officer, which...