#Authorinterview with Bruce Thomas
Today, Feathered Quill reviewer Ephantus Muriuki is talking with Bruce Thomas, author of American Insurgent Ukraine: A Special Projects Unit Thriller.
FQ: Samuel Ball and Artem Bilyk live centuries apart, yet their stories mirror each other closely. When writing them, did you see them from the very beginning as thematic reflections of one another?
THOMAS: It wasn’t until late in the writing process that I realized Samuel Ball and Artem Bilyk were reflecting each other across centuries. That was a pleasant surprise as an author.
On the surface, they come from completely different worlds—Samuel is an enslaved man in the 18th century searching for freedom, while Artem is a modern CIA operative betrayed by the very agency he served. But beneath the surface, both men are fighting the same battle: survival, identity, and the struggle to reclaim control of their lives after being used by powerful systems.
Once I recognized those parallels, I leaned into them more deliberately. Their stories became connected by themes of betrayal, resilience, and the cost of freedom, even though they are separated by hundreds of years. I think that contrast helped give the novel a deeper emotional layer beyond espionage and historical mystery.
FQ: Did you want readers to see the novel as a thriller or as a broader exposition on power and institutions?
THOMAS: I wrote American Insurgent Ukraine first and foremost as a continuation of my Special Projects Unit series. My goal has always been to create an entertaining escape for readers—a world they can step into outside the noise and pressures of everyday life.
I try very hard not to project my fiction directly into today’s political turmoil. I think that can be dangerous on many levels, and it can also pull readers out of the story. Instead, I focus on creating believable characters, high-stakes situations, and layered mysteries that feel timeless rather than tied to a specific political moment.
That said, questions of power, institutions, loyalty, and corruption naturally become part of espionage fiction. Those themes exist because they are part of human nature and history, not because I’m trying to make a political statement. At its core, though, the novel is meant to be a thriller—blending suspense, historical mystery, espionage, and adventure into a story that keeps readers turning pages.
FQ: How much research went into the Revolutionary-era storyline?
THOMAS: A tremendous amount of research went into the Revolutionary-era storyline because I want my books to be historically accurate whenever possible. I try to build my fiction on a foundation of real people, real places, real timelines, and actual historical events so that even serious history buffs can stay immersed in the story.
One of my biggest goals as a writer is to avoid moments where a reader stops and says, “They didn’t have that in 1776,” or “That wouldn’t have happened during that time period.” If there’s a question about technology, language, ships, weapons, politics, trade routes, or even daily life, I research it until I can either confirm it fits the era or adjust the story.
The Revolutionary War portions of American Insurgent Ukraine required deep research into colonial America, Nova Scotia, British naval operations, and the legends surrounding Oak Island and Samuel Ball. I enjoy finding the historical gaps and problems before readers do. That attention to detail helps me create a world that feels authentic while still delivering the suspense and pacing of a thriller.
FQ: Samuel Ball emerges as one of the novel’s emotional anchors. What do you love most about his character?
THOMAS: What I love most about Samuel Ball is his strong sense of right and wrong. Even while fighting for his own survival and freedom, he’s able to see problems on a much bigger level than just his own life. He understands injustice deeply, and that gives him both strength and compassion throughout the story.
He constantly tries to become better despite the hardships around him. He builds relationships with people who need him, not people he can use for advantage, and that says a great deal about who he is at his core.
One of the most emotional parts of writing his character was the loss of his girlfriend. I wanted readers to truly feel his pain and helplessness in that moment. She leaves for America, but because Samuel is still considered a runaway slave, he cannot safely follow her without risking everything. That separation becomes more than just a lost romance—it represents the cruel reality of how little control he truly had over his own life, even while fighting so hard to claim his freedom.
His relationship with Frenchy also became one of my favorite unexpected developments in the novel. It wasn’t planned from the beginning, but it grew naturally as the story unfolded and added another emotional layer to Samuel’s journey.
FQ: Artem Bilyk carries a lot of internal conflict beneath his professionalism. Was it difficult balancing his human side with his role as an assassin?
THOMAS: Yes and no. Artem Bilyk began in my mind as an assassin first, so softening and humanizing him actually became a fairly natural progression. After all, he can’t get much darker than the way readers first meet him in the opening scene. From there, the challenge was to find the layers beneath professionalism and violence.
What interested me most was showing that even someone trained to operate in that world still struggles with trust, loyalty, and emotional connection. His relationship with the Black Widow helped expose that side of him. There’s attraction and understanding between them, but Artem is still a CIA operative at heart. He never fully trusts the first meeting, no matter how strong the connection feels.
In many ways, his mindset reflects the old intelligence community saying, “Trust, but verify.” That becomes part of Artem’s personal code. He wants connection, but experience has taught him that trust can be deadly if given too easily. That internal conflict helped make him more human and, I think, more believable as the story progressed.
FQ: The novel suggests that systems of power often use and discard people. Was that idea the central theme from the beginning, or did it emerge naturally as you wrote?
THOMAS: I knew from the beginning that the fallout from the rogue CIA director introduced in Book #2 had to carry forward into this story. A person in that position couldn’t hold onto power without creating damage around them. If he acted too cautiously or too kindly, eventually someone inside the system would turn against him. Power at that level almost always comes with paranoia, manipulation, and sacrifice.
So while I didn’t start the novel intending to make a broad political statement, the theme of powerful institutions using and discarding people emerged naturally from the story itself. In espionage fiction, loyalty is often conditional, and people can become expendable very quickly. Artem Bilyk lives in that reality every day.
More broadly, I think every government throughout history has had individuals determined to protect and expand their own power. That isn’t unique to modern times, it’s been true since Caesar and long before. Human nature doesn’t really change, even if the institutions and technology do.
What interested me as a writer was exploring how ordinary people survive and maintain their humanity within systems that often value power over loyalty or morality. This might take many books to solve.
FQ: What challenges came with balancing two timelines without losing momentum in either story?
THOMAS: Balancing the two timelines was probably one of the biggest structural challenges in the book. I had to carefully look for natural breaks in each storyline before shifting to the other timeline. You can’t just jump back and forth across 225 years without thinking about pacing, tension, and how the narrative is progressing for the reader.
Another important factor is that the timelines can’t feel too similar. If both stories are about the same type of events—bank robbers, war heroes, or multiple love affairs—readers can start to lose track and think, “Which timeline is this?” I wanted each storyline to have its own identity, tone, and emotional weight while still connecting thematically beneath the surface.
At the same time, one of the fun parts of writing dual timelines is using those transitions strategically. Sometimes moving 225 years right before a major event creates a kind of “stress point” in the narrative. The reader is left hanging for a moment, which builds suspense and anticipation—as long as you don’t overuse it.
When it works well, the timelines begin to complement each other instead of competing with each other, and that was one of the most rewarding parts of writing American Insurgent Ukraine.
FQ: Did any characters surprise you or evolve differently from how you originally imagined them?
THOMAS: Yes, absolutely. Some of the core Special Projects Unit characters—Bill, Mark, Shaun, and Jennifer—have now been with me through three books, so their personalities, motivations, and relationships are already very developed. At this point, I know how they think and how they’ll react under pressure.
The character who surprised me the most in American Insurgent Ukraine was Samuel Ball. As the historical storyline developed, he grew far beyond what I originally imagined. He became the emotional and narrative glue tied to the treasure mystery. Samuel held the key information, but the real tension for readers became discovering what he was ultimately going to do with the loot and what kind of man he would choose to become.
The Black Widow also evolved in an unexpected way. Initially, I thought she would play a relatively small role in the story. But as the writing progressed, she became much more important—not just to Artem Bilyk, but potentially to the future of the SPU series itself. By the end of the novel, she had grown into someone who could realistically become a future SPU agent, and that’s a major step for the character.
FQ: What do you hope readers should ponder on after finishing the novel?
THOMAS: I hope readers finish the novel feeling entertained first, but also feeling like they learned something they may have taken for granted in history. That’s one reason I included the endnotes. I want readers to look deeper into the real events, places, and people that inspired the story and realize that history is often far more complicated and fascinating than we remember from textbooks.
More than anything, I want readers to feel Samuel Ball. His struggles, sacrifices, setbacks, and victories were very real, even if parts of the story are fictionalized. He fought for freedom, dignity, and a better life in a world that constantly tried to deny him those things.
I also wanted readers to recognize that people like Hard Ass Fulton truly existed during the Revolutionary era and right up until the Civil War. Many individuals fighting for freedom from the King of England still did not believe freedom applied to everyone. That contradiction is part of the reality of history. The same people demanding liberty for themselves could deny it to others without seeing the hypocrisy. I think understanding those contradictions helps make history feel more human and honest.
On the thriller side, I wanted to approach the genre differently. Artem and the SPU team ultimately defeat Brunel and Westinghouse more with intelligence, strategy, and persistence than with endless violence. Too many thrillers seem to believe every story has to end with everyone dead and everything destroyed. I wanted to challenge that idea and show that brains, loyalty, and resilience can be just as powerful as firepower.
FQ: If readers were to take one message away from American Insurgent Ukraine, what would you want it to be?
THOMAS: If readers take one message away from American Insurgent Ukraine, I hope it’s the sense that ordinary people—working together with intelligence, courage, timing, and technology—can really make a difference. I want the Special Projects Unit to feel believable, almost real.
I never wanted the SPU team to be superheroes. No supermen or women. I wanted them to act like normal people placed in extraordinary situations. They make mistakes, they question themselves, they rely on each other, and they solve problems with preparation and teamwork more than impossible action scenes. Ideally, readers finish the book thinking, “That could actually happen,” or even, “I could see myself doing that.”
Historically, I also wanted to reinforce how terrible the institution of slavery truly was and how deeply it affected people long after freedom was finally achieved. Characters like Samuel Ball carried those scars for the rest of their lives, even after escaping bondage. The struggle didn’t simply end once freedom was obtained.
At the same time, I wanted readers to understand the contradictions inside early American history. Many people fought passionately for liberty during the Revolutionary era while denying those same freedoms to others, and that mindset existed right up through the Civil War. History becomes much more real when we acknowledge both the ideals and the failures of the people who lived it.
FQ: Do you have plans to continue the Special Projects Unit series, or do you anticipate American Insurgent Ukraine being the final book in the series?
THOMAS: Writing is a process, and I think each book has reflected my growth as an author. My first book, The Hope of the South, was honestly a jumbled mass of words. The story itself was strong, but the delivery wasn’t where it needed to be. My second book, Chaos Above the Sand, became larger, more developed, and it greatly expanded the SPU team and their relationships. Writing was improving.
Now with Book #3, American Insurgent Ukraine, I finally feel like I’ve written what I would call a complete novel. The pacing, character development, historical depth, and emotional layers all came together in a way I had been striving toward from the beginning.
As for whether the series is over—I’m not sure a well-developed series is ever truly finished. There are always more stories to tell because there are always new threats, new conflicts, and new bad guys in the world. As long as the characters continue to grow and readers remain invested in the SPU team, I think there will always be another mission waiting for them.
