I looked at this book as an academic. I study nuclear weapons development, delivery systems, and all that stuff. If it blows up real big, I am into it. So please do take this into consideration as I go into my review.

This book is about as plausible as the last Sasquatch sighting. But perhaps that is why so many people seem to desperately want to cling to it. The author makes several unforgivable lapses in judgement, such as reconstructing the last days of the K-129 - a Golf II class ballistic missile sub that he asserts was on its way with 11 "mysterious" personnel who somehow were trying to launch an SLBM at Pearl Harbor in 1968, in the hopes that the U.S. would automatically suspect the CHINESE and attack them, thus eliminating Russia's main continental threat. He furthermore maintains that the warhead suffered a low-order detonation of the warhead as a result of the Permissive Action Lock failsafe device triggering some of its plastic explosives as a means of somehow punishing a crew severely if it tried something sneaky.

PUH-LEEZE!!!!!

First, the author needs to content himself with some facts: he claims to have worked as in the reactor space of one of our snooper-boats, yet he obviously doesn't recall ever having "Spooks," or CIA intelligence-gathering operatives on his boat. If he does, then why doesn't he think that the Soviets did the same thing? Or they could have been technicians working on the newly-installed navigational gear. But of course, these were just mystery men who seized the boat. I'm getting spooked already...

Then there is his reconstruction of the events of the sub just prior to its loss. HE CANNOT KNOW THIS STUFF - THE ONLY ONES WHO DID DIED ON THE BOAT. But it is a "Non-fiction novel," right? La la la la la... Now the psychopathic commies raise to fire their missile and...

This gets goofy: he describes a "cold launch" system to fire the missiles FROM A SURFACED POSITION - in essence this system uses compressed air to blow the missile free from its launch tube AS THE SUBMARINE IS SUBMERGED. The predecessor to the submarine, the Golf I class HAD to fire while surfaced, and used an elevator platform to lift the missile clear of the launch tube, of which there were three located in the sail. The Golf II was specifically created to be able to utilize the R-21 missile, which GAVE IT AN UNDERWATER LAUNCH CAPABILITY. If the author had even bothered to actually read Pavel podvig's book, "Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces," WHICH HE CITES, he would know that the K-129 would not have fired from the surface, but submerged. But well, that would conflict with the story... La la la la la....

So the permissive action lock triggered the missile's warhead to self destruct? IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. It prevents the missile from firing, or the warhead from detonating, but it DOESN'T POP THE EXPLOSIVES ON THE WARHEAD. It would render it inert - and THAT IS ASSUMING THAT THE R-21 HAD A PAL SYSTEM. Not to mention that such an explosion would have opened up the missile's fuel tanks (it was a liquid-fuelled missile after all) and most likely would have blown open the missile hatches covering the other two birds in their tubes. GUESS WHAT HAPPENS THEN? You have two more missiles blowing their fuel tanks, and in the end, there wouldn't be enough of that sub left to fit in a sardine can. Boom. Big rocket fuel explosion. Bye bye boat, and Mr. Hughes doesn't build the Glomar Explorer.

I hope that I haven't ruined anyone's fun here, and if you like sea stories, this one might keep you company on a rainy night, but it is absolutely implausible. Oh, I didn't mention that he states that a secret "Jennifer" satellite "detected" the missile fuel explosion. I thought that "Jennifer" was the code name for the attempted recovery, not surveillance of the world for infrared sources... And being able to discern "between house fires and rocket fuel." Errr, right. I am familiar with the Vela satellites, and I am familiar with the early warning satellites that sit in geosynchronous orbits at great distance that look for rocket plumes, but this satellite system is unfamiliar to me... OH, THAT'S RIGHT - he cites THAT information FROM A DISCOVERY CHANNEL TV PROGRAM. Now if that isn't an accurate source, I don't know what is. When the television becomes part of the basis of a book that claims to be somewhat factual, I blanch. If that is the case, the author may wish to ask Starfleet if Scotty would be so kind as to beam him up to the Enterprise so he can look at the dilithium crystals.

He discounts the possibility that there was a missile fuel leak, or another scenario where the sub might have surfaced briefly to try and vent its missile tube - such as in the scenario portrayed in the book "Hostile Waters" where a leaking launch tube caused a missile detonation and the eventual loss of the sub and several of its crew. But that would dismiss the idea that psycho Reds were trying to get us to blow up the Chinese...

AND THE CHINESE DID NOT HAVE A BALLISTIC MISSILE SUB OF THEIR OWN UNTIL 1988. How would they have nuked us at Pearl Harbor?

Oh, and there's lots of Glomar Explorer conspiracy hooplah, but I have probably taken up enough of your time.

This book requires a willing suspense of disbelief. As I study this stuff for a living, I ain't that willing.

I looked at this book as an academic. I study nuclear weapons development, delivery systems, and all that stuff. If it blows up real big, I am into it. So please do take this into consideration as I go into my review.

This book is about as plausible as the last Sasquatch sighting. But perhaps that is why so many people seem to desperately want to cling to it. The author makes several unforgivable lapses in judgement, such as reconstructing the last days of the K-129 - a Golf II class ballistic missile sub that he asserts was on its way with 11 "mysterious" personnel who somehow were trying to launch an SLBM at Pearl Harbor in 1968, in the hopes that the U.S. would automatically suspect the CHINESE and attack them, thus eliminating Russia's main continental threat. He furthermore maintains that the warhead suffered a low-order detonation of the warhead as a result of the Permissive Action Lock failsafe device triggering some of its plastic explosives as a means of somehow punishing a crew severely if it tried something sneaky.

PUH-LEEZE!!!!!

First, the author needs to content himself with some facts: he claims to have worked as in the reactor space of one of our snooper-boats, yet he obviously doesn't recall ever having "Spooks," or CIA intelligence-gathering operatives on his boat. If he does, then why doesn't he think that the Soviets did the same thing? Or they could have been technicians working on the newly-installed navigational gear. But of course, these were just mystery men who seized the boat. I'm getting spooked already...

Then there is his reconstruction of the events of the sub just prior to its loss. HE CANNOT KNOW THIS STUFF - THE ONLY ONES WHO DID DIED ON THE BOAT. But it is a "Non-fiction novel," right? La la la la la... Now the psychopathic commies raise to fire their missile and...

This gets goofy: he describes a "cold launch" system to fire the missiles FROM A SURFACED POSITION - in essence this system uses compressed air to blow the missile free from its launch tube AS THE SUBMARINE IS SUBMERGED. The predecessor to the submarine, the Golf I class HAD to fire while surfaced, and used an elevator platform to lift the missile clear of the launch tube, of which there were three located in the sail. The Golf II was specifically created to be able to utilize the R-21 missile, which GAVE IT AN UNDERWATER LAUNCH CAPABILITY. If the author had even bothered to actually read Pavel podvig's book, "Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces," WHICH HE CITES, he would know that the K-129 would not have fired from the surface, but submerged. But well, that would conflict with the story... La la la la la....

So the permissive action lock triggered the missile's warhead to self destruct? IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. It prevents the missile from firing, or the warhead from detonating, but it DOESN'T POP THE EXPLOSIVES ON THE WARHEAD. It would render it inert - and THAT IS ASSUMING THAT THE R-21 HAD A PAL SYSTEM. Not to mention that such an explosion would have opened up the missile's fuel tanks (it was a liquid-fuelled missile after all) and most likely would have blown open the missile hatches covering the other two birds in their tubes. GUESS WHAT HAPPENS THEN? You have two more missiles blowing their fuel tanks, and in the end, there wouldn't be enough of that sub left to fit in a sardine can. Boom. Big rocket fuel explosion. Bye bye boat, and Mr. Hughes doesn't build the Glomar Explorer.

I hope that I haven't ruined anyone's fun here, and if you like sea stories, this one might keep you company on a rainy night, but it is absolutely implausible. Oh, I didn't mention that he states that a secret "Jennifer" satellite "detected" the missile fuel explosion. I thought that "Jennifer" was the code name for the attempted recovery, not surveillance of the world for infrared sources... And being able to discern "between house fires and rocket fuel." Errr, right. I am familiar with the Vela satellites, and I am familiar with the early warning satellites that sit in geosynchronous orbits at great distance that look for rocket plumes, but this satellite system is unfamiliar to me... OH, THAT'S RIGHT - he cites THAT information FROM A DISCOVERY CHANNEL TV PROGRAM. Now if that isn't an accurate source, I don't know what is. When the television becomes part of the basis of a book that claims to be somewhat factual, I blanch. If that is the case, the author may wish to ask Starfleet if Scotty would be so kind as to beam him up to the Enterprise so he can look at the dilithium crystals.

He discounts the possibility that there was a missile fuel leak, or another scenario where the sub might have surfaced briefly to try and vent its missile tube - such as in the scenario portrayed in the book "Hostile Waters" where a leaking launch tube caused a missile detonation and the eventual loss of the sub and several of its crew. But that would dismiss the idea that psycho Reds were trying to get us to blow up the Chinese...

AND THE CHINESE DID NOT HAVE A BALLISTIC MISSILE SUB OF THEIR OWN UNTIL 1988. How would they have nuked us at Pearl Harbor?

Oh, and there's lots of Glomar Explorer conspiracy hooplah, but I have probably taken up enough of your time.

This book requires a willing suspense of disbelief. As I study this stuff for a living, I ain't that willing.

Recenly, I read Red Star Rogue. Controversial did get my attention.
Prior to reading, I checked the internet for information about the K129 and Project Jennifer.
Reading the book was worth the time. The book does offer believable explanations rather than general statements about the events surrounding the K-129, its location, and salvage. There certainly seemed to be interest in salvaging the K-129.
In the 1960's and 1970's there was concern about the Russians, Cold War activities, and the Chinese. Henry Kissinger was admired for his skillful negotiations and contributions in detente and opening the door of China.
Within the context of the book, the special bond submariners share is described along with an Armageddon situation that could have occurred had a rogue mission been successful.
I am interested in more information about the R/V Teritu and the radioactive oil slick sailed into during an academic,ecological research in the area of Oahu in 1968 along with the FOIA concerns presented by Harriet Ann Phillipi in regard to Project Jennifer.

While not necessarily all believable the detail of research is very good. Well written but stretched a little long. It was nice to stroll down memory lane as to the facts and fears of the Cold War era.

This book accurately relates parts of history that have remained a mystery for years. There is some speculation, however, the author is very convincing and has done his homework. I throughly enjoyed reading this book.

As another reviewer, William F. Twist, states, authors Kenneth Sewell and Clint Richmond claimed the acoustic signatures of the Soviet diesel submarine, K-129, recorded by a PERMIT Class submarine in 1968 were processed by land-based Cray supercomputers when the first such computer was not completed until 1976,

In 1968, the year K-129 sank, and for several years thereafter, any recordings of Soviet submarines made by US submarines would have been sent to the Naval Scientific and Techincal Intelligence Center (NAVSTIC) in Building 52 on the grounds of the US Naval Observatory in Washington, DC. Then, as now, such detection events were analyzed by Intelligence Research Specialists with near photographic memories. Computers were not then, nor are they now, used to evaluate such data. (This may come as a shock to those who believe computers are capable of solving almost all complex analytical problems.) As head of the Branch within NAVSTIC responsible for the analysis of all such data, I can state categorically that no K-129 acoustic signature information was received from any US submarine in 1968.

This, and other egregious errors documented by Twist, indicate Sewell and Richmond engaged in the complete fabrication of events to support their conspiracy theory and sell the book.

Sadly, this has become common practice by those who must be called "hack journalists." The motive: sell books to the technically uniformed and conspiracy gullible public. A more recent example is Ed Offley's book, SCORPION DOWN, which propounds unfounded conspiracy theories and ignores the pressure-collapsed condition of the wreckage on the bottom and the complete absence of any damage consistent with a torpedo attack.

SCORPION was lost because of an onboard problem the crew could not overcome before the submarine sank to collapse depth. The Soviets were miles away minding their own business. Sewell's next book, "All HANDS DOWN: The True Story of the Soviet Attack on the USS SCORPION," due out 15 April 2008, will doubtless follow the same conspiracy story line although we can expect a few new fabrications to convince the buying public that Sewell's book is "better" than Offley's. We can also expect other hack journalists to provide back-of-the-dust-jacket reviews praising Sewell's effort as "a daring expose that reveals what the US Navy has for decades kept hidden" or some such drivel. This is a neat - but not very nice - reciprocal (quid pro quo) arrangement among such journalists: "You endorse my book and I'll endorse yours." This leaves the prospective buyer without an objective assessment of such books until they are critically reviewed - and their technical weaknesses exposed - in limited distribution publications such as NAVY TIMES or the US NAVAL INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS.

Although much of the data was not declassified until recently, one can certainly see where authors such as Tom Clancy have found their inspiration. This is a riveting true story. Regardless of your opinions of the author's conclusions, the facts and details are endlessly fascinating. To know the story of Red Star Rogue is to understand better the dynamics of the Cold War.

There have been a lot of quibbles about details in the various reviews, most of them are missing the fundamental point: If it wasn't an attempted rogue launch, what was it?

On the other hand, I don't buy the notion that the missile was destroyed by a fail-safe. There's one problem with that notion: Why was somebody outside at launch? I can't imagine that that would be survivable. I think it's much more likely something went wrong preparing to launch.

Addressing various gripes:

I don't think disagreements about exactly where it sunk matter because the CIA has an incentive to hide it's true location.

As for the guy who said there would be nothing to salvage if the nuke went off--it's only the high explosive that seems to have gone off. If you simply fire one of the detonators the warhead will be blown to bits but will *NOT* produce a nuclear yield. All the detonators must be fired at *EXACTLY* the right instant for it to make a mushroom cloud.

As for China not having such missiles--they did. The Gulf I the Russians sold them. They didn't have h-bombs to put on them but we had no conclusive evidence they didn't have them, either.

I claim to know almost nothing about subs, being an old grunt myself. But I have read Cotten Collier's "A Matter of Risk" which covered the Project Jennifer and was written in the 1980's by a member of the Project Staff.

His claims jive with Craven's as to the status of the sub on the ocean floor (broken in two), the parts recovered and the fact the recovered section of boat broke in two while being lifed off the floor and the Conning Tower was lost. One missile also fell out of its tube to the floor.

Also at least one torpedo with a atomic warhead was recovered. As Collier's Brother was part of the crew that took the sub apart screw by screw, I'd take his version over.

I'd say that the "story" would make much more sense if he included Space Aliens, Di-Lithium Crystals, and a few cute kittens for the "human intrest" value.

I sincely hope the writers go back on their Meds before they write another book.

If you want a book thats more believable, buy "The Book of the Subgenius" here. I'd beleive in J.R. "Bob" Dobbs before I'd believe these guys!

This book is certainly worth reading. It's written like a newspaper article, using simple concepts and phrases. I wish it had been better at listing its sources. There are many listed at the end of the book (broken down by chapter), but at times it's difficult to see exactly what is attributed to what source.

As to the theories expressed by the book, they are simply that - theories. However they do provide some interesting pieces of data, and another way of looking at the incident.

I found this book to be credible from a very different line of evidence. I was stunned to read about this event because after almost 40 years of wondering it suddenly made sense of a life-defining event in my life. I can't bracket the time more closely than some time in early 1968 (I remember the first buds on the trees), but I wonder if what happened to me then relates to this Red Star Rogue story that I learned about only a year ago.

In 1968 was a very young pastor in Lincoln, Nebraska, just out of seminary. I was praying late one night in our church office when I felt a tremendous terror: it was like I could "see" a Satanic figure entering the front doors of our church, walking down the main aisle of the sanctuary getting ready to turn left toward our offices. I have never, ever experienced such utter horror and fear. I was praying frantically, confessing any sin, but suddenly found myself desperately screaming in prayer for the safety of our country. In this experience, I had the strong impression (and had told others later) that someone in Russia was about to pull the nuclear trigger--I couldn't tell if they had or hadn't. After a long terrifying time I felt it was over and that we were OK.

I naturally had doubts about my discerning such an event, because it all sounded so implausible. But at the same time I couldn't account for my prayer experience that was so unspeakably real, powerful and occurring only once like that in my life. That week I told friends about this prayer experience. Five of them (three in different US states) told me that they had also felt it necessary to pray for the safety of the country that week, something that was unusual for them, so I felt that I wasn't the only one that sensed the danger. I have had a few other similar experiences like this (like for personal protection or healing), that proved to be valid, but never, ever anything so intense and terrifying.

I would have one disagreement with the authors: they suggest that it was the fail-safe device that kicked in on launch, but I find two problems with that: 1) surely the "unknown" crew, commissioned from the highest levels to launch the missle, would have had the launch codes right, but more importantly, 2) any "fail-safe" mechanism would allow the missle to launch and detonate well clear of the sub and the crew, and not blow up at ignition, as in this case, destroying both. There was evidence that the fail-safe explosives went off, but that could have been a consequence of the on-launch explosion of the dangerous liquid fuel, like the Squall torpedo that destroyed the Kursk sub recently.

Frankly, I believe the hand of God intervened, limiting the consequences to the tragic loss of the crew, as a powerful message to Suslov and Andropov (the ultimate perpetrators, "soul-less men with dead eyes" as one Soviet Navy man described them). Sadly, the wife of the sub captain had a similar "spiritual" experience of horrifying grief, as she collapsed sobbing and was hospitalized at the time sub went down with her husband, not knowing directly what had happened until much later.

I always wondered what in the world was going on during that time, almost 40 years ago, but never had any possible answer until recently, when I read a summary of Red Star Rogue in an online financial newsletter and later in the book itself. From my own life-changing experience, then, I'd say the book has credibility, and adds credibility to the testimony that events of history are also *divinely* shaped--representing more than the naive plans of men and the mere collision of molecules.
Jon R., PhD

Red Star Rogue by Kenneth Sewell is the definitive work on a most terrifying event of the Cold War. As a nuclear submariner on active duty during the period the events of the book took place, we were privy to some information regarding the K-179, but hardly knew the complete series of events that surrounded the loss of the submarine. While the book is well documented, my only criticism is that much of the information is repeated numerous times, adding bulk to the story and requiring extra reading time. It could be rewritten more concisely and still tell this grim tale.

Instead, the authors claim it to be non-fiction. The book is so full of technical and chronological errors (many quite basic) that all possible credibility is destroyed. For example, the book states that the one-megaton nuclear warheads carried on the K-129's missile have a yield equivalent to 1000 tons of TNT; in reality, one megaton = one million tons TNT equivalent. Another simple, verifiable error is that the authors claim that the crews of USS Parche & USS (Richard B.) Russell received awards for their part in the K-129 recovery efforts in late 1968/early 1969. These two subs weren't even built yet! Also, the authors repeatedly use presented hypotheses as facts later in the book - a cardinal flaw in any form of deductive reasoning. The end result is just populist conspiracy theory trash.

In light of recent events, i.e., North Korea testing their first nuclear bomb, Red Star Rogue is very thought provoking and timely. There is enough facts in this book to draw the conclusion that there was an attempt to draw the United States into a war with China. Very well written.

I have Read 3 books on this subject Project Jennfier / Spy Sub / On this book this one is the best one so far on what happened to the K-129.
Why some people what to believe the B.S that the Gov says is beyond me.
Of course the Gov never lies if you believe that i have some ocean front property in Mo i can sell you!!
I this is as close as a person will get to the truth on what happen on the K-129.

A plausible interpretation of events, with the interesting backdrop of Cold War history. Could someday be the basis for a good submarine fiction movie production.

This book was very informative. It was accurate.
I knew of the incident, but not the particulars, and this book
went into detail.

My overall opinion is this book would have been cheap at 10 times the price. It should be required reading in history classes.

It is the most astounding book I have ever read. It adds hundreds of details on 1 of Soviet Russia's submarines known as K-129 which sank in the Pacific near Hawaii in March 1968. After long searches by the Soviet fleet and much US investigation, the US sub USS Halibut secretly found and photo'd it about 3 miles deep later in 1968. In the early 1970s, the Glomar Explorer secretly raised most of the seriously damaged Soviet submarine. The media mentioned a bit of the mysterious news in the post-Watergate era of mid 1970s. A few years ago the book "Blind Man's Bluff" added many intriguing details to the mystery of the sinking of the Russian sub. "Red Star Rogue" provides numerous details that point to the likelihood that the Russian sub self-destructed during an attempted launch of one of its nuclear missiles about 350 miles northwest of Honolulu!!! This incredible (if true) event was apparently not sponsored by Brezhnev (the USSR Cold War leader of the day). Did Andropov or Suslov order it? One of the 1st folks to find evidence of the sinking were University of Hawaii folks. The book implies that a full accounting of what happened is long overdue (to say the least)!!! Photos of the wrecked Soviet sub are apparently still held by the CIA, and the book implies that careful exam of the ultra top secret pictures will show that the sub was destroyed when its nuclear missile blew up in the sub's launch tube. Somebody, the media, the government, or some of the people involved should come forward and tell the world what the hell happened in March 1968. In any case, President Johnson promptly ordered the development of an anti-missile defense system, and all presidents since have maintained the secrets about this possibly-barely-avoided armageddon. Criticism of the book seems to be strictly uninformed criticism of the book's brief speculation about the evil-doers' never-to-be-known motives; but I've seen no questioning of "the facts". There's a Yahoo Group on the subject.

I just completed reading Red Star Rogue. It was compelling beause I was in Hawaii on that date - March 7, 1968. While there certainly is strong evidence to support the authors hypothesis, in the form of photographic evidence, satellite surveillance, hydrophonic signatures, the analysis of the oil slick by the University of Hawaii, and the subs departure from normal operating procedure, there were two questions that I felt were not adequately addressed. The foremost being the issue of the fail safe device. In his book Sewell states that missiles were delivered to K-129 before departure on their ill fated mission. The KBG had control of all nuclear warheads in the USSR. The KBG was part of the plot. Why didn't the KBG remove the fail safe device on these missiles so that no code, held by multiple parties, was needed to launch them?

Second, of lesser importance, how did the Soviets finally determine there were 98 men on board the sub? No crew manifest was ever found according to Russian sources. Is this information that was obtained from an internal Soviet investigation after information on the K-129's mission was shared with Bresznev? The author does not explain either of these two important points.

It has been said that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Also the propensity of ostriches to put their heads firmly in the sand when threatened is well known (true or not). The reviews of this startling book remind me of both of these cliches. I too have found that people just DON'T WANT TO HEAR about this incident which seems amply proved to me. Not only is the case itself well made, but the probable fall out from the disaster explains so many puzzling events of the cold war that I at least am persuaded. Like most Americans I had many other "important" things going on in my life during the period covered. The disinformation campaigns were extremely convincing if anyone had been curious. I feel that every American ought to try to read this book. It is tough going. That's why I only give it 4 stars. It is repetitious and awfully dull reading at times. In other places it is riveting. The book has the feeling of truth. When was the last time you read a book about contemporary affairs that had that feeling? I especially recommend the last few chapters to the unbelievers.

...are just some words with discrete meanings nevertheless confused in "Red Star Rogue", which tells the story of the Soviets' K-129, a diesel-powered, nuclear armed sub that sank in the Pacific in early 1968. Already famous for the American effort to salvage it using the "Glomar Explorer" (documented in 1998's "Blind Man's Bluff", but already well-known), K-129 had long been assumed lost due to catastrophic accident. "Rogue" instead boldly argues that K-129's loss resulted from a botched attempt to launch missiles against Hawaii - a plan sanctioned at the top of the Soviet leadership in the hopes of instigating a Sino/American war. Almost as dramatically, the authors also repudiate accounts that the Americans recovered only part of K-129.

To call the author's case "circumstantial" doesn't begin to cover "Rogue"'s problems. Intriguing at first for its depiction of life aboard a crude Russian sub, "Rogue" soon veers into "Philadelphia Experiment" territory when the authors demonstrate a willingness to piece together any evidence regardless of how poor the fit, how little it supports the author's case or excludes more reasonable alternatives. (Contrary to popular belief, "circumstantial evidence" isn't insufficient or even just lower-grade evidence - it's still bound by old-fashioned rules of reasonability, which the authors bury at sea.) Most of the story relies on information which suggests what would or could have happened, but with too little if anything to establish what did happen. The authors avoid any reasonable explanation undermining their claims with such painful obviousness, that just finishing this book will test your suspension of disbelief. "Rogue" is loaded with footnotes - most of which cite to meetings with anonymous sources, or to either "Blind Man's Bluff" or Burleson's history of the "Glomar Explorer", but few sources corroborate either of the book's central theses of a rogue-attack or a successful salvage. The authors assault the reader's intelligence by making claims only corroborated by the author's other unsubstantiated claims, and sometimes not even supported by them.

Like a house of cards, the authors balance a host of possibilities on top of each other as supportive proof - there were extra men on K-129 placed at the last minute, but there's no record of them (a memorial later carries extra names, but the authors never follow up on them) - but if they had been there, they could have been KGB "Oznaz" commandos who could have commandeered the ship, and would have had training in using nukes; the Americans determine the truth, but kept quiet for "political" reasons (for the authors, it's enough to say how tense the American political situation is and say that the considerations for the cover-up were indeed political without having to explain why the political situation tilted against disclosure; in our "Wag the Dog" era, it's quaint to think that our national leadership was so preoccupied in 1968, that it actually smothered any word of a homeland security issue). The authors lunge for every possible conclusion, and drop a few sensationalist hints that they never bother to follow up (links to convicted turncoat John Walker & the mysterious loss of the USS Scorpion being two examples; my guess is that Walker's role is overblown here - there's no explanation for how the former USN radioman had access to sensitive diplomatic documents).

The authors' proof is also selectively analyzed. Extra crewmen are "established" to have been on K-129, even though there's no record of their being aboard, and any record, the authors say, could have been falsified by the high-ranking plotters. The authors never consider that evidence establishing that these men ever existed may have been a simple clerical error (if the plotters were highly placed, couldn't they have simply substituted the desired crewmen?). The authors discount a voluntary role played by the actual executive staff because their high rank made them loyal - but then implicate higher ranking members of Soviet leadership; the extra crew accidentally destroy the ship trying to bypass safeguards on the ship's warheads, but it's never explained why loyal agents of such highly authorized sources lacked access to the weapons that obviated a bypass; the authors determine that a missile explosion destroyed the ship - but make the leap to an explosion caused by an attempted launch, and ignore any other hardware failure like the one that caused the Nedelin tragedy, or the one involved in the loss of Submarine K-219 in 1986 (K-219 rates nary a mention in "Rogue"). The authors posit conspirators trained on nuclear-weapons, but not trained adequately. Lastly, the Americans go out of their way to recover K-129 intact because they can use it as proof of the Soviets' plot as leverage against them - even though the sub itself (according to "Rogue") is likely cut up for scrap by those same Americans almost as soon as it's brought back to California.

Though claiming the attack was meant to frame the Chinese, the authors utterly fail to present evidence pointing to China: K-129 was an advanced member of a class of subs found only in Soviet service, crewed by uniformed Soviet sailors and armed with Soviet missiles. The authors utterly fail to provide information that Americans in 1968 would have needed to link the attack to China, or explain how the Soviets could have refuted suspicions that the attack was their own. It's as if the authors spent most of the book hyping some horrible plot - then neglecting to include the plot as well.

Finally, and most egregiously, the author's spend most of the book "debunking" the nearly-official story of K-129 & her recovery, dismissing some claims as ludicrous - but still relying on many such sources for corroboration. Why the accepted story is the wrong story, but sufficient for their purposes will remain a mystery the authors are not likely to reveal in the near future.

From the book Blind Man's Bluff we learn about the Glomar Explorer - a ship designed to retrieve a USSR sub that had sank. Growing up in the 1970's I did not recall the news storm around this - so I read with interest. Then one of my coworkers shows me this book Red Star Rogue : The Untold Story of a Soviet Submarine's Nuclear Strike Attempt on the U.S. and I borrow it from him.

In short, the KGB push orders through the USSR Navy to quickly launch when it was not supposed to, adding a bunch of KGB operatives to take a sub K-129 to just north of Hawaii and launch their Nukes at Pearl Harbor. They screw it up, have a Nuke incident & sink the ship in March of 1968 . The book goes into details and refutes facts in previous books, details on the Nixon administrations desires and political games with the Jennifer (Glomar Explorer) project.

At times the book skips in the flow (although that could be me and my opportunities to read the book); but the political insight into 1960s and 1970s America as well las the in depth dissection of the project makes this a mandatory read. Consider it an update to prior texts on the subject, from updated research.

This book has two big problems: it lacks convincing evidence to support the central theory and it is unorganized and redundant.

The authors have a far-fetched theory supported mainly by supposition. Information sources cited often consist of other books and anonymous others who the authors admit are two to three times removed from an original source, such as a satellite photo. The authors never satisfactorily refute the simple explanation, "mechanical failure." (Soviet subs often had mechanical problems, i.e., K-19.) A young sailor found wearing a senior officer's sheepskin coat is cited as evidence of a mutiny. The authors say anonymous sources reported twelve mysterious men were added to the crew, but they do not have a list of the crewmembers. The authors say such a list would be faked anyway. Huh? Other major "evidence" includes a feeling the XO's wife had at a party the day the sub sank. This feeling is discussed at length. Most preposterous of all, the authors assert the Russians were trying to trick the US into believing the Chinese had launched a nuclear attack. In 1968, any nuclear attack would have been assumed Russian and the US would have retaliated against Russia, not China. China was having a lot of trouble with their few nuclear-armed subs and they did NOT patrol the coast of the US, while the Russians did.

Facts about the crew are spread out over several chapters and often redundantly repeated. For example, the same details about the crew (i.e. full name, rank, school attended, etc) are noted several times in different chapters. The hierarchy of the sub's top three officers was explained at least three times. A better book would have spent the first chapter briefly describing the crew without repeating this information later. A description of the sub's last days is sketchy about the sub's movements, yet includes a detailed description of the doctor handing out vitamins and wet towels. Unlike most US submariners, the authors refer to a "Crazy Ivan" as a "Butterfly Maneuver." A good submarine book editor could have helped immensely in making this more compelling as a novel.

With all our concern for nuclear terrorism today , this is the story of how close we we came to disaster in 1968. The author relies on his experience,a lot of leaks, and material published by others to reach very believable and alarming conclusions. I highly recommend this book

Very well written. The technical review is excellent. The conclusions drawn by the author are more than plausible, they are the only answer.

The story of the K-129 and the Glomar Explorer is certainly known. Briefly a Soviet submarine sank and the CIA attempted to recover the boat. From here the story gets a lot more strange. The official story is that the lifting device, called 'Clementine' broke while lifting the sub and that the sub broke in two with the largest part falling back to the sea bed.

I've heard it rumored that another, or perhaps several more, trips were made with the Global Explorer and that more parts of the sub were brought up.

This book describes another rumor that has been making it around the web, to wit: The K-129 had become a rogue ship and intended to launch nuclear missiles at Pearl Harbor and perhaps at the mainland.

The story as told here is presented as true. It says that the K-129 was attempting to mimic a Chinese sub to start a war between the US and China. Could this have been true? It would have been an awfully risky move on someone's part. And boy if it had been determined that the missile had been launched by the Soviets....

...but two items need to be pointed out:

1. China's first sub carrying nuclear weapons was put to sea in 1980. She sank. Twice. K-129 met her demise in the early 70's.

2. Had the nuke detonated in the tube (as they author claims), there would be nothing to salvage.

Don't waste your money.

I've served on subs, read a lot of books on subs, and do a lot of intel gathering on historical and current submarine events. While the overall scenario is plausible, the author stretches about 17 facts across 300 pages. The story could have been told with just as much intrigue in a 10-page short story. I would have even rather had the author more embellish some (unsubstantiable) character development rather than repeat the same old assertions, chapter after chapter.

I can add little to the other reviews of this book presented here, other than to say that the scenario presented in it is more far more plausible than it is implausible. One reviewer remarks that China had no missile program at the time and that both we and the Soviets knew it, so why would whoever set this up have believed that having a Soviet sub hit Honolulu with a 1-megaton warhead would make us think that the Chinese did it? *Did* we and the Soviets know at the time that China had no ICBMs that could have delivered such a missile to Honolulu? Was something going on in China that most of us didn't know about, only those at the top here and in Moscow aware of it, that would scotch that idea? Then there's the question of why someone supposedly near the top in Moscow, probably in the KGB, would not know that a proper code had to be given to unlock the fail-safe device so that the missile could be fired. At that point, the planet the KGB was on wasn't quite that occupied by the Soviet military or anyone else, and a plot that looked good to whoever set this mess in motion and to those who tried to carry out a nuclear strike on Hawaii might have had holes in it big enough for a fleet of 18-wheelers to drive through. We just don't know enough to be certain. Until we do have all the pieces of the puzzle, so far the scenario presented in RED STAR ROGUE is *very* plausible, the best available so far to everyone except those directly involved in the incident -- and all of them are dead. "History starts 100 years later." Until 2068, I think this is the best we're gonna get.

Wow. This book was disturbing. You generally hear "I couldn't put it down" applied to Mystery and other Fiction. This was the first Non-Fiction book in years to keep me totally involved from the first page to the last.

But now I hunger for a little more. You read a single book on the JFK assassination and you come away all outraged at the Pro-Castro Cubans. You read two, and you find out it was actually the Anti-Castro Cubans. Three books? The Mafia did it. Four? It was the CIA. On and on, each one making a good case on its own, but falling apart in major or minor ways when compared to other sources. This is my first K-129 book. I'm convinced the book is true and amazed at the story it tells. But now I need to check a few others--and thanks to the reviewer who provided several other titles. I'd love to hear the arguments against this theory, now.

If you have a good, long weekend ahead, this is the book for anyone interested in international intrigue, politics and political infighting, naval (especially submarine) operations and even for devotees of the Techno Thriller genre. In fact, I can't imagine a better evening that sitting down with Tom Clancy to hear what he thinks of all of this....

So. . . let me get this straight. At a time when Red China had no operational submarines armed with nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, we are supposed to believe the Soviets were dumb enough to develop a plan to fire a ballistic missile from a submarine and incinerate a US target in Hawaii with megatons or perhaps kilotons of nuclear explosives because this act would convince the US to retaliate and nuke . . . China? Ah. . . how devious of those Russkis. But my gut feeling is that SAC would have went after Moscow and Beijing a tad later. I don't think the Russkis were this stupid. Recommend someone consider Plan B. The Golf Class subs were junk. Someone or something on board this particular Golf-class sub failed; and a lot of sailors died horrible deaths under the sea. But in any event, if a sequel is planned, the KURSK disaster would make a great plot device.

Sewell cannot be commended enough for documenting the story of K-129, an extremely important story of a near Cold War disaster. The story involves an older model diesel-electric Soviet submarine 350 miles off the coast of Hawaii carrying three nuclear missiles and in the midst of a 3/7/68 countdown for a surface launch against Honolulu. Subsequent intelligence indicated that the submarine had been taken over by an 11-man KGB crew added at the last minute. K-129 was capable of an undersea launch and hitting Hawaii from about 1,200 miles away - however, doing so from the surface at a much closer distance matched the newest Chinese submarine capability. Since the profiles of the K-129 and Chinese submarines were very similar the KGB leadership intended that the U.S. conclude that the attack came from China, launch a massive retaliation against China (becoming increasingly hostile to the U.S.S.R.), and allow Russia to then move into and exploit desirable areas of China.

The "good news" is that the KGB either didn't know about the warheads' "fail-safe" mechanism (which may have been modeled after U.S. technology donated to the Soviets), or failed to bypass it. In any case, conventional explosives detonated the warhead as it was being launched - destroying and sinking the submarine while dispersing radioactive material in the area.

A KGB assumption was that the U.S. was not able to track Soviet submarines. However, the submerged listening cables near the Russian base for K-129, special receiving sensors, and numerous satellites were able to do so. As a result, the U.S. knew almost exactly where K-129 was at the time of its sinking, while the Soviets assumed it was at the last location it reported from - almost 1,000 miles away.

The "bad news" is that Soviets concluded that the American submarine Swordfish (photographed returning damaged to Japan) had punctured K-129 from below, causing its demise. As a result, the Americans suspect that Soviets torpedoed and sank the U.S. submarine Scorpion a few weeks later in the Atlantic.

Fortunately the U.S. Halibut (deep research submarine) was able to locate K-129 (the Soviets could not), take countless photos and retrieve its bell. Nixon/Kissenger arranged for some of the photos to be anonymously left at the Russian Embassay; the information and photos also helped improve relations with Communist China. Top-level U.S. thinking is that the photos helped Brezhnev overpower Suslov and Andropov - the plot's leaders who lived in the same apartment buildilng in Moscow. (The plotters were known to be very upset at the direction the U.S.S.R. was moving in.) Two years later the plotters were all missing from the May Day parade - illnesses; shortly thereafter the U.S. and Russia signed Salt I and other agreements.

The final act in this saga was the U.S. (via Hughes Tool and Glomar Explorer supposedly mining manganese nuggets) recovering most of the K-129. At least two Russian bodies were buried at sea, with honors; not much else is known about the specifics of what else was recovered.

Excellent, well-worth reading!

The many technical errors have been noted by Mr. Feldman's review. However, if the authors had wanted to write a novel, they should have. How on earth do they describe the weather, the moods, the actions of the crew without evidence to support it. Also, the Cray computers which they state the Navy owned in the 60s weren't built until the 1970s. If you want some conspiracy theory thrills, go to the video store. The co-author should maybe stick to writing stories about entertainers.

Mr. Sewell has compiled an interesting set of half-truths, conjecture and outright fabrications interspersed with Soviet operational procedures and human-interest details to advance a frightening scenario that a rogue Soviet submarine attempted to launch a nuclear missile at Pearl Harbor. Mr. Sewell has taken advantage of the recent spate of books about cold war submarine activities to publish his version of a specific event, no doubt to his benefit. One sentence from John Craven's book "The Silent War" i.e. "there existed a possibility, small though it might be, that the skipper of this rogue submarine was attempting to launch or had actually launched a ballistic missile with a live warhead in the direction of Hawaii." is the basis of his doomsday premise. He take this conditional conjecture, throws in a cabal of high level KGB conspirators, and delivers an almost 300 page book. The central thesis behind his assertion of a rogue launch is his claim that the sub went down at 163º W Lon, 24º N Lat. This is critical since the K-129 was armed with three SS-N-5 Serb missiles with a range of approximately 760 nautical miles. Pearl Harbor is 327 nautical miles from the claimed sinking site, well within the range of the Serb missile. If the sub sank at the official claimed site of 180º Lon, 40º N Lat, it would be more than 800 nautical miles short of the presumed target.

As a senior staff engineer, now retired, with Lockheed Missiles and Space Co., I was the responsible engineer for the Digital Data Link (DDL) which provided commands to and telemetry from the "claw", we designated the Capture Vehicle (CV), and the control van on the HGE. Since the DDL was a complex poorly documented one-off system and vital for the mission, I was recruited to go on the mission to ensure its operation. I was a member of the crew that sailed out of Long Beach on June 19, 1974 and maintained the link during the entire operation, and at times manned one of the consoles in the control van. As a result of my direct experience with the mission, I have some valid observations to make.

There are many inaccuracies in his description of the Hughes Glomar Explorer (HGE) and the raising of the Golf II class K-129. Without getting into details that are interesting but not really germane, the essential facts are: The location of the recovery site was not restricted to "ranking members of the Glomar crew and the CIA managers" as Mr. Sewell claims. Certainly the seamen (ship drivers) were well aware of the recovery position, as was the recovery team. Contrary to his assertion, there were no restricted areas on the ship except the communication van and the rig floor during dangerous pipe handling conditions. Others, and I would frequently visit the bridge where we could observe the Transit Nav Sat position being displayed on the navigation console. Besides, anyone with a boy scout's knowledge and protractor could observe the sun at local noon and determine the latitude to within a couple of degrees. The upshot of all this is:
The position of the K-129 recovery site was on the180º meridian, approximately 40º N Lat. The longitude was so spot on the International Date Line, that there was some discussion as to the date to use in the recovery log. Since the voyage originated east of the date line, we continued to use this date.

Even John Craven doesn't dispute this position. In page 212 of his book he writes "she would have filled with water and would have sunk like a rock-and we would find her at exactly 180/40."

Additionally, I can absolutely confirm that:
1 Only the forward 38 or 40 foot (depending how you measure) section of the bow was recovered.
2 There were only 6 to 10 bodies (depending on how you reassembled body parts) in the recovered section rather than the 60 or so that Sewell claims.
3 The ship's bell was recovered from its attachment near the bow, not from "the center section of the conning tower" as Sewell alleges. This is an important point because Sewell claims its retrieval in the conning tower proves that the center section of the sub was recovered.
4 No missiles or warheads were recovered.
5 No codebooks or encryption equipment was recovered.
6 Two crushed almost unrecognizable objects were identified as nuclear tipped torpedoes by a naval officer in mufti.
7 The interior of the recovered section appeared much like an archaeological site with everything compacted into a dense mass.
8 The K-129 had broken into two major pieces, probably on impact since the sections were so close together. The forward section was approximately 136 feet in length and designated the Target Object (TO). The CV was configured to only recover the TO in its specific attitude on the ocean floor. There was no intention to make more than one round trip, nor would it have been possible due to the strain on the heavy lift system and its frequent breakdown.
9 Charring of some combustible material in the recovered section indicates that dieseling, as a result of implosion may have occurred.

It is true that the recovered section was radioactively contaminated with what turned out to be weapons grade plutonium. This would certainly indicate that some sort of catastrophic event took place. Not surprising given the inherently dangerous nature of liquid fueled rockets, and the Soviet submarine service's very poor safety record.

I have discussed these details with a former Lockheed colleague and shipmate on the HGE, and we agree on the facts stated above. I am not employed by any entity, governmental or private. I have no motive beyond the desire to squelch half-baked conspiracy theories by advocates who profit from their advancement.

Mr Sewell uses interviews and declassified papers to put together a theory explaining the sinking of a Soviet SSBN in 1968. While the facts he produces support his theory, many of his conclusions are merely conjecture. Sewell also has a bad tendency of repeating himself, giving the book the feeling of a high school history paper.

All in all the book is still worth a read for the information it does contain. Hopefully in the coming years, more information on this incident will be declassified, allowing for a more detailed, and more exact explanation.

"Red Star Rogue", written by Kenneth Sewell and Clint Richmond, examines one of the most intriguing incidents of the Cold War. This was the loss of the Soviet Golf II class ballistic missile submarine (SSB) K-129, and the subsequent examination and recovery of the wreck by the United States. Previous books that have examined this incident include Clyde Burleson's 1977 "The Jennifer Project", and the CIA sanctioned story of the recovery in the 1978 "A Matter of Risk" by Roy Varner and Wayne Collier. Additional information can be gleaned from chapters in the books "Blind Man's Bluff" (Sontag & Drews), Dr. Roger Dunham's "Spy Sub", and John P. Craven's "The Silent War". In this new book, Sewell and Richmond take advantage of the opportunity to conduct research within the former Soviet Union, and to interview those involved or affected on both sides of the story. They assemble a plausible scenario to explain the intense interest the American government took in an obsolete, sunken diesel powered ballistic missile submarine.

Sewell uncovered previously unknown facts about the rapid resupply and hasty departure of the K-129 from its base on the Kamchatka Pennisula, and "extra" last minute crew additions. The basic thesis is that the submarine was part of a secret plot by an inner "cabal" within the highest levels of Soviet Government (centered around Mikhail Suslov and Yuri Andropov), hidden from Premier Leonid Brezhnev. The plot was to have K-129 emulate a Chinese Golf I submarine (an earlier transfer from the USSR before the split with China) and launch a one megaton nuclear missile toward Pearl Harbor. The purpose was to precipitate a nuclear exchange between the US and China, removing the China threat to the USSR and simultaneously permitting Soviet troops to move south into China, establishing a Soviet hegemony in Asia. The resulting geopolitical shift would have left the USSR in a much stronger position (and possibly promote leadership change to the hard liner Suslov circle).

The book follows the submarine's frantic last minute crew changes and probable steps along the way on the voyage towards Hawaii. The submarine apparently failed to broadcast scheduled mandatory radio checks, and ended up quite far from its assigned patrol area. The authors build a case by piecing together seemingly disparate evidence that the K-129 was just 350 miles from Pearl Harbor and on the surface when it attempted missile launch. This profile would have simulated a Golf I submarine with the shorter range R-13 (NATO SS-N-4 Sark) missile with the earlier D-2 launch system, which required surface firing. In fact, the Golf II K-129 carried the longer range R-21 (NATO SS-N-5 Serb) and the D-4 system that permitted submerged missile firing. There would be no reason to be that close and on the surface if this were a sanctioned attack by the Soviet government. The authors speculate that a nuclear fail-safe system led to an aborted launch and missile explosion, resulting in the sinking of the K-129 in 16,400 feet of water. Unlike the CIA account, which had the submarine some 1800 miles northwest of Hawaii (well out of missile range for either system), the current book places the submarine dangerously close to Hawaii.

The subsequent detailed covert examination of the K-129 wreck by the Special Operations submarine USS Halibut is described. Earlier accounts (Burleson, Varner & Collier) did not include the highly successful work of Halibut as the details of its capabilities were classified until 1994. None of the over 22,000 photos taken by the ROVS deployed by Halibut have ever been declassified, but the authors did speak with some who have seen the photos. The thorough examination and possible recovery of small pieces of K-129 revealed almost all of the technical details of this older diesel powered SSB class. The submarine was not in a single piece as claimed by the CIA (A point made earlier by Burleson in his book), and the photos showed damage consistent, upon detailed technical analysis, with the probability of an attempted failed missile launch. The analysts concluded that the submarine was most probably "rogue", as the USSR was not on high alert nor were they other signs of other preparations for war on the date the K-129 had sunk. Additionally, when the Soviet Navy searched for the lost K-129 when it was overdue in reporting, the search was concentrated in the submarine's patrol area, well away from the actual wreck site.

This "rogue" conclusion stimulated the effort to build the Glomar Explorer and associated recovery equipment for the expressed purpose of recovery of the K-129 to examine and prove the supposition that it was in fact a "rogue" submarine. This proof would have demonstrated this conclusively to the Soviet leadership. The construction and deployment of the Glomar Explorer, costing over $500 million (1970 dollars), in a remarkably short period of time during a time of rising inflation and the costs of the Vietnam War, underlines the high priority given to examine and attempt to understand the motives of the K-129. The remarkable technical details of the recovery of K-129 wreckage from over 16,000 feet of water (much deeper than the Titanic wreck) are provided, along with the argument that the Glomar Explorer was on station long enough to recover several large pieces of the submarine. Among the finds revealed for the first time in this book are that the majority of the crew was jammed into forward compartments of the submarine, away from the command and control centers. The speculation is that an Osnaz Special Operations unit, boarded at the last moment before sailing, seized control of the submarine as it neared its patrol area, confined the crew, diverted it to the firing position and attempted the missile launch. In fact, a recent memorial ceremony for the lost crew members lists 99 men lost, well above the normal 83 man crew number for this submarine class. Another fact is that the explosion was not in the battery compartment, as indicated in "Blind Man's Bluff", but instead in a missile tube in the sail of the Golf II. The submarine wreckage, which was highly radioactive, was carefully dissected once on board the Glomar Explorer. Whether the missile launch guidance data was also recovered from the wreck is unknown; this would have been critical to proving the intent of K-129 to launch on Hawaii. Reasons for the disinformation and coverup to the American public about the K-129 and the Glomar Explorer operation are also examined. Among these would have been the shear panic around how close we came to having Pearl Harbor and Honolulu destroyed in a large nuclear blast in March of 1968. There were repercussions within the Soviet Union as well, as apparently some of the recovered information from Halibut and the Glomar Explorer were shared with senior Soviet leaders and naval personnel. This was to underline the deep seriousness of this episode and the need for effective controls on nuclear weapons by the Soviets in the future.

In assembling the chain of evidence to build this story, the authors have had to search widely to attempt to present a plausible set of events. Much of the new material comes from conversations with former officials and naval personnel in Russia. I doubt the writers have everything correct, and suspect that even they are not perfectly confident of every last detail and point. A relative weak point in the argument is why the proposed Osnaz operatives on board would not have been provided with the proper failsafe launch codes if the conspiracy included some members at the highest levels of the Communist leadership. The failure to launch the missile correctly is postulated to have led to the subsequent rapid sinking of the submarine. Nonetheless, the book's arguments and conclusions are intriguing and deeply disturbing. One might hope that this book will stimulate the US government to be forthcoming in the near future as to what really occurred to K-129 some 37 years ago in the Pacific, and what we learned from the investigation of the wreckage. This is a book that needs to be widely read and debated. If the authors are anywhere near the truth, the important lessons learned cannot afford to be held by a mere handful of people.


I would like to address an earlier reviewer's comments about "Conspiracy Theories". There is certainly an existing body of facts about the K-129, the Halibut operations and the Glomar Explorer. This new book brings fresh evidence and insight into a case that has been clouded over the years by purposeful disinformation. "Red Star Rogue" attempts to clear some new ground, and argues that the K-129 case was of tremendous significance to the course of world history. I did have the opportunity to hear Mr. Sewell speak at a recent book signing in New London, CT., and he impressed me as very thoughtful, had done his research carefully, and made his points very logically. Further, Mr. Sewell is a qualified submariner and nuclear engineer who spent five years on the Special Operations submarine USS Parche, successor to the Halibut, and the subject of several chapters in "Blind Man's Bluff". He speaks from the viewpoint of someone who participated directly in covert Cold War operations. He mentioned the assistance of Dr. John Craven in pointing him toward source materials during research for the book. I would also quote page 200 of Dr. Craven's 2001 book "The Silent War". Speaking about the K-129, Dr. Craven, who was the architect of the Halibut operations, says, "I believe that the public now has a right and its own need to know the true story before it is lost forever". The implication is clear that there is far more to the episode than has been publicly disclosed. "Red Star Rogue" may provide answers to some of these haunting questions.

I learned long ago that sharing my interest in the Cold War at the dinner table was a sure-fire conversation stopper. Throwing caution to the wind, and utterly fascinated by Red Star Rogue, I mentioned it among family and friends over the weekend. Such is the general appeal of Messrs. Sewell and Richmond's book that their response was the same as mine: astonishment and great interest. Sewell and Richmond tell a compelling, credible tale, creating an entirely plausible story that may indeed be true.

Beyond the failed missile attack on Pearl Harbor is the successful recovery of K-129. Sewall and Richmond make a strong case that the oft-repeated story that the submarine was only partially recovered was the product of skillful CIA disinformation. One of the outcomes of this frightening incident is the Nixon Administration's rapprochement with China.

The book is indexed and contains notes describing many of the sources.

Highly recommended.

History records that in March 1968, President Johnson, succumbing to mounting pressures from the war in Vietnam, declined to stand for re-election. But Johnson may have had more than Vietnam on his mind. Earlier that fateful month, a nuclear-armed Soviet Golf-II submarine sank just 350 miles from Hawaii.

What the sub was doing there and how it met its demise may never be proven definitively. But author Kenneth Sewell presents a convincing case -- though one not without caveat, conjecture and speculation -- that the sub was a rogue executing a furtive mission to provoke a nuclear exchange between the U.S. and China. As Sewell presents it, the KGB commandeered the sub, K-129, with the intention of delivering a nuclear strike on Pearl Harbor. The audacious plan -- masterminded by KGB Boss Yuri Andropov and his mentor, Mikhail Suslov -- would be executed in a way that pointed responsibility at China, capitalizing on growing U.S. fears of a bellicose Mao Zedong. A U.S.-developed fail-safe mechanism, designed to prevent an unauthorized missile launch, is all the prevented the sinister plan from succeeding. The Johnson Administration had shared the fail-safe technology with Moscow only a couple of years before the incident. Instead of incinerating Pearl and a good part of Oahu, the nuclear missile destroyed the K-129, sending all 98 crewmen to their final resting place at the bottom of the Pacific.

Sewell relates at length the K-129 incident's diplomatic impact -- he speculates that it facilitated both Nixon's detente with the Soviets and his rapprochement with the Chinese -- as well as elaborate CIA efforts to recover the enemy sub (in violation of international law) and to keep the truth about the renegade sub's motives from ever being revealed.

I don't go in much for conspiracy theories. And a casual reader has no way of knowing how much of Sewell's tale is truth and how much is fiction. But the case he makes certainly sounds plausible - or at least possible.

all submarine stories are generally exciting and this one i could not put down. i am not sure if the story is really true, because all the actual witnnesses died, but the author goes to great lenghts to prove it. it is about a red sub that goes rouge and almost starts wwiii. what a story ..