You mean you want us to plan for wars in advance?
Thursday, April 22, 2004 at 1:01PM
Thomas P.M. Barnett

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 22 April


Reference: "Pentagon Funded Mideast Plans In Secret Prior to Iraq-War Vote," by David Rogers, Wall Street Journal, 22 April, p. A4.


I must be too cynical for my own good, or too much of a military insider to find anything surprising in Bob Woodward's book, "Plan of Attack." Everyone I know or interacted with in this business following 9/11 knew that Saddam was in the crosshairs as far as this administration was concerned. The White House said it was in a war and was determined to lay a shock on the Middle East just like bin Laden had on the U.S. Scores were going to be settled. Saddam would be given time and chances galore to avoid his fate, but the endgame was to be set in motion ó if he did not step aside or give up everything asked for, he would be forcibly removed. Again, none of this was a secret to anyone I know or interact with in the defense community. Nor were any of these efforts to put in place the equipment, infrastructure, personnel, understandings with allied militaries, etc. needed to make the threat of war not only credible but on target and on schedule should Saddam pass up his final chances.


How did the Pentagon pay for this? Same way it always does, stealing from Peter to pay Paul within its budget. Did any of this spending constitute an act of war? Hardly. All of it could be rationalized within the existing efforts to squeeze Saddam and keep his forces within the box of the northern and southern fly zones. No secret war, no secret funds ó unless you somehow expected the Pentagon to pull a war plan out of its ass the day after our final offer to Saddam expired.


I must confess, I find nothing in Woodward's book compelling or new or enlightening. I find it one big spin-athon by everyone in this administration looking over his or her shoulder toward their individual legacies. True to form, Colin Powell plays it both ways. That man's entire career has been one giant exercise in putting off tough decisions til the last possible moment, choosing wrongly almost every single time a gut-check decision was required, and then later lamenting that his 20/20 hindsight wasn't respected. Tell me, other than simply holding a lot of fabulous jobs, can anyone name a genuine success within his widely assumed legacy of "great leadership"? Anything at all?


And if you say the Powell Doctrine, then let's lay the blame right here and now for the mess in Iraq in his lap. The Powell Doctrine has done nothing more than pervert our military force structure over the past 15 years, generating a first-half force in a league that keeps score until the end of the game.


But I digress . . .


I know how important it is inside the Beltway to ask "what did he know and when did he know it?" That's why Woodward is such a world-class journalist. He epitomizes what Washington has become ó almost leaderless but rife with investigations.


The Pentagon is always planning for war in secret. That's what it does for a living. It would matter what Congress approved or didn't approve if we still actually lived in a world where the United States declares war, but we no longer live in that world. Woodward's book and his charges are completely irrelevant to the tasks and questions at hand. When you get the press breathlessly reporting this sort of crap (the Wall Street Journal . . . come on!), you know we're hitting rock bottom in a political season.

Article originally appeared on Thomas P.M. Barnett (https://thomaspmbarnett.com/).
See website for complete article licensing information.