That Wacky Wacky Doug Feith Posted by Michael Cohen

Thanks to Ilan for posting Thomas Ricks preview piece on Doug Feith's 900-page bitchfest on the war in Iraq. It's astounding that with everything that has gone wrong in Iraq and with the fact that the Pentagon basically ran the post-war occupation, Feith sees fit to blame State, the CIA and Paul Bremer for everything.

You'd think when one is talking about the greatest foreign policy blunder in American history that the people actually responsible for that blunder (the Pentagon, the White House etc) might bear some of the blame as well. But then being a Bushie means never having to say you're sorry.

It really does beg the question: is the Bush Administration more allergic to competence or responsibility? Commenters feel free to weigh in . . .

Comments

[David Tomlin]

If 'Bremer refused to implement' the brilliant policies of Bush and Rumsfeld, the question arises of why his ass wasn't fired as fast as Garner's. I wonder if Feith addresses it? Anyway, I'm looking forward to the book.

[John B.]

When Feith and Wolfowitz were relaxing in the hot tub with Ahmad Chalabi, he told them that if he were named PM of Iraq he would run an oil pipeline from Basra to Israel. Both ardent supporters of Israel, they ate this up. It's shocking that they thought this possible, or free of consequences if it were.

[John B.]

When Feith and Wolfowitz were relaxing in the hot tub with Ahmad Chalabi, he told them that if he were named PM of Iraq he would run an oil pipeline from Basra to Israel. Both ardent supporters of Israel, they ate this up. It's shocking that they thought this possible, or free of consequences if it were.

[Don Bacon]

the Pentagon basically ran the post-war occupation

Rumsfeld has claimed that Bremer was not under his control. From an interview with Bob Woodward: "And Jerry Bremer, of course, is a presidential envoy and, as such, he reported to the president and to Condi at the NSC staff."
http://www.defenselink.mil/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=3744

Rumsfeld also claimed in the interview that he was a get-in-and-get-out guy in the Jay Garner mold.

Was Rummy fabricating? Possibly.

[David Tomlin]

'My chain of command ran through Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and straight to the president.' (L. Paul Bremer, _My Year in Iraq_, p. 4)

According to Bremer, Rumsfeld was a 'get-in-and-get-out guy' until Bremer himself converted him. On September 13, 2003, Rumsfeld 'expressed enthusiasm for the concept of granting sovereignty as soon as possible to the Council or some other group of Iraqis', and asked Bremer for a paper arguing the contrary. On the same day Bremer sent a memo, and Rumsfeld replied with a 'short note', '"I agree with your memo and will send it to POTUS [President Bush] and members of the NSC."' (Ibid, pp. 167-168)

Bremer says that on December 6, Rumsfeld told him 'I'm bowing out of the political process. Let Condi and the NSC handle things.' (Ibid, p. 245)

[Don Bacon]

Whether Rumsfeld was "converted" or not I'm sure is a complicated subject, requiring a deeper understanding of the political powers at work in 2003.

Bremer's background was State/NSC/Kissinger so I suspect that Rumsfeld was not comfortable with him, nor on a larger scale with nation-building. (Who is? Bush claimed long ago that he wasn't.)

Incidentally, I think we have to be careful here that we don't complain about Pentagon primacy (v. State) on the one hand and then turn around and criticize the Pentagon for not taking enough responsibility. We've got a situation in the Middle East right now where, due to a State diplomatic vacuum, Admiral Fallon, a Pentagon representative, is making the diplomatic rounds. Some people don't think that's a good idea, but with a virtually invisible State Dept. what is the alternative? Back to Iraq, the great Colin Powell was present at the inception, wasn't he?