Tuesday, 10 August 2004
Taking out Saddam Hussein: A Review of Bob Woodward's Plan of Attack - THE COMMENTARY
By Joseph Planta
VANCOUVER - Jobs, the economy, and Iraq will be amongst the principal subjects that will weigh heavily during the upcoming presidential campaign in the United States. Homeland security has reared its head as well what with the recent release of the 9/11 Commission's report. Republicans in the forthcoming campaign will doubtless conclude that they are the party best equipped in protecting Americans from terror. Democrats have long battled the perception that they are weak on defence. John Kerry however has argued that George W. Bush has actually made Americans more vulnerable to attack thanks to alienating the greater world with the pre-emptive war in Iraq. If we were to believe Senator Kerry, from his speech at the Democratic National Convention, then he would do better.
Bob Woodward has fashioned a remarkable career uncovering those covered veils that plague the American government, as it plagues all governments. He and Carl Bernstein exposed Watergate as more than just a third-rate burglary. In his previous book, Bush at War, Woodward received plaudits for writing a lively and revealing account of the Bush administration's reaction and action after September 11th. Republicans naturally found the book appealing as it cast George W. Bush as a confident and competent war leader. Plan of Attack, a natural follow up, is both recommended by Republicans and Democrats. Republicans wish to highlight the President's accomplishments in prosecuting the Iraq war, while Democrats want Americans to read about the march to war that this administration led on little more than a combination of faulty intelligence and less than honourable reasons.
Plan of Attack is written in the inimitable Woodward style; it is vivid, lucid, reflective, and generally balanced in its look at the President and those around him in those critical days when the war was crafted and executed. The key to Plan of Attack and its predecessor is that it comes with the gravitas and reputation of Woodward, who is at once a doggedly determined reporter, while a remarkably powerful journalist. It is said there's an unwritten dictum in Washington, that if Woodward calls, you play or pay. Naturally, the Bush administration granted Woodward unprecedented access to minutes, memos and documents heretofore unreported to the public. With exclusive interviews with most if not all of the principals in the government, Woodward has pieced together an accurate and energetic behind-the-scenes précis of the war in Iraq.
Unlike more partisan tomes, some of which could be properly termed anti-Bush books, which have become a sort of cottage industry in this highly political climate, Plan of Attack does not presume that the administration was obsessed and or hell-bent on going into Iraq from the beginning of its term. Rather the book reports that the war planning took off sooner than first publicly admitted, some 72 days after the attacks of September 11th, and that many within the administration raised doubts about the wisdom of going to war. Colin Powell for one, warned the President about the so-called Pottery Barn rule, that if you break it, you own it. "You will own all their hopes, aspirations, and problems," warned the Secretary of State in the summer of 2002, when a potential war was being discussed within the administration. Publicly, you'll recall that the official line was that no war was imminent, and that diplomatic efforts would be exhausted fully. The book reveals that the administration had commissioned plans to be drawn up, as to the plausibility of a conflict. Powell and those within the State department were naturally hesitant, and considered the White House's focus on Saddam Hussein as a "fever." Others however, like Vice President Cheney, felt that the threat of Saddam Hussein was great, and that the United States had "an obligation to go to stand up a democracy" in Iraq. Cheney, Woodward reports, told friends, after Baghdad fell, "Colin always had major reservations about what we were trying to do."
The perceived dichotomy that is said to exist within the administration, between people who've donned soldier's uniforms, like Secretary Powell, with his deputy Richard Armitage; and more hawkish figures like Vice President Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, who have never seen combat, is highlighted in this book. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice is seen as a steadying figure often managing conflicts between the secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld. Some have said that it is revealing that the President did not ask Powell as to what he would do were he president, as to going to war, though he did consult with Rice and his communications adviser Karen Hughes.
It is also curious that President Bush did not consult, of all people, his father, former President George H.W. Bush, who was in office during the Gulf War in the early 1990s. When asked by Woodward if he discussed with his father the issue of Iraq, Bush hauntingly said, "You know, he is the wrong father to appeal to in terms of strength. There is a higher father that I appeal to." What one could make of that remark is endless. It is further telling as it reinforces the idea of how this President Bush disdains elites and Washington types who are rooted in bureaucracy and power games. You'll recall that George W. Bush came to the White House a proud outsider.
One of the premises on which this war was based, was that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, or at the very least, possessed the capability of possessing WMD. According to intelligence provided by the CIA and its director George Tenet, it was to be a "slam dunk," that Iraq possessed WMD. The search for WMD thus far has hardly been fruitful, and director Tenet has since resigned from the CIA citing "family reasons." President Bush denies that Tenet's ouster was forced, or that it had anything to do with the CIA's faulty intelligence; however to Bush, Tenet's declaration that it would be a slam dunk was very important in helping him make up his mind as to going to war.
Woodward also reveals the close relationship had between the administration (not to mention the Bush family) and the Saudi royal family. Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador, had access to the President that was unprecedented. In January 2003, he was briefed by administration officials such as Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Richard Myers. There are allegations that Bandar received briefings while some administration officials, namely Secretary Powell, were left in the dark about the war planning. Secretary Rumsfeld is reportedly to have said to Bandar, "You can count on this . . . this is going to happen," in an effort to reassure him that the Americans were serious about going into Iraq. "Prince Bandar, once we start, Saddam is toast," continued Rumsfeld.
The style with which Woodward contends with in writing this first draft of the history of the war is particularly appealing. Taking what is remarkable access to the players and their documents, Woodward weaves a history that is alive and helpful in understanding the complexity of Iraq and what it poses for the future. His crafting of the story makes history more interesting, and this is Woodward's gift, his ability to draw on materials and craft them into prose that draws the reader into the events, making it read as if it were a novel. Bush at War read like a good novel, and Plan of Attack reads the same way.
The idea that George W. Bush is an ideologue can be inferred from this book, as well as the litany of titles - both pro and anti-Bush - that have been written about this President beginning with David Frum's The Right Man, through to Molly Ivins's books, and Michael Moore's tomes. There seems to be no middle ground when considering this president. He is a polarising figure, where half see him as disciplined, decisive, and unwavering in his dedication; while the other half see him as nothing more than ideological, stubborn, and impertinent. This book, however, is fair in how it presents the events, and how insightful it is especially with its impartiality and the bit of hindsight had.
In reading Plan of Attack, one got thinking about the religious ideals that so obviously guide George W. Bush. He honestly believes in what he is doing, and that it is right and just. He argues passionately that his actions, especially in the war on terror, and the conflict in Iraq are rooted in some idea that it is his mission in life, as preordained by God. Whatever motivation guided Bush to go into Iraq, he makes it clear that he's resigned to whatever fate history may bestow on him. When asked as to how he thought history would judge him, Woodward writes: "Bush smiled. 'History,' he said, shrugging, taking his hands out of his pockets, extended his arms out and suggesting with his body language that it was so far off. 'We won't know. We'll all be dead.'"
The sketches that Woodward paints are remarkable and valuable. They say that journalism is the first draft of history, and with his books, Woodward has offered amazing insight into the times. This book, Plan of Attack reveals much about this war heretofore unknown. Many will use this book in arguing for and against this administration's thinking in prosecuting a war that some will say was necessary, while others will dispute as needless. Whatever the case, it is clear the book has evoked a greater purpose. Amidst the partisan bickering that has preceded and that will doubtless ensue in the heat of the campaign ahead, this book is an essential record of a divisive and polarising time that figures heavily in the history of this world.
***
Plan of Attack by Bob Woodward is published by Simon and Schuster, and is $40.50 CDN ($28.00 USD) (ISBN: 074325547X).
Click to buy this book from Amazon.ca: Plan of Attack-30-
Questions and comments may be sent to: editor@thecommentary.ca
An archive of Joseph Planta's previous columns can be found by clicking HERE .