Average Rating: 
Rating:  - Portrait of a Leader
The events of September 11 changed the mindset of many people in this country, me included. By way of full disclosure, I admit that I voted for Al Gore mainly because I thought that George W. Bush was a lightweight who would wilt in a crisis situation. Events have proven me wrong. In his latest book, veteran journalist Bob Woodward goes behind the scenes to see how the terrorist attacks changed President Bush and his cabinet and how this effected development of the subsequent 'war on terror'. It is not a history of the events in question. How could it be given that the events are still going on? Moreover, Woodward is no historian. Rather it is an attempt, by a consummate insider, to give a near contemporaneous behind the scenes look at Bush and his principal advisers in the aftermath of the attacks. In this he largely succeeds.Woodward was given a good deal of access to the principals involved. The book reveals a lot about the private personas of Bush, Vice-President Dick Chenney, Sec. of State Colin Powell, Defense Sec. Donald Rumsfeld, National Security Adviser Condaleeza Rice and CIA Director George Tenet. These people comprised Bush's inner circle in his initial efforts to formulate an appropriate response both at home and abroad. The book does not cover, except in passing, such important figures from the period as FBI Director Robert Mueller, Transportation Director Norman Mineta, Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge or Attorney General John Ashcroft. Rather, Woodward sought to focus on those persons with close access to Bush. This is because the real point of the book is to present a portrait of Bush as a leader at war. The book covers in some detail the early meetings of the 'war cabinet' and shows Bush's evolving thought and how his advisers effected that thought. Powell is presented as the consummate diplomat, a 'dove' who saw his role as countering the hawkish advice of Cheney and Rumsfeld. Rice is revealed as a bit mercurial, her views constantly changing and evolving. Bush himself is revealed to be thoroughly in control from the first moment, running the meetings with skill and demanding options and answers from his subordinates. The events of 2001/2002 with which we are all familiar are presented from the back stage and we see how the administration actually reacted to accomplishments and set backs in Afghanistan as well as how much they feared a further attack. Contrary to liberal opinion, Bush is not a puppet controlled by anyone, not Carl Rove, not Cheney and not the 'neo-conservatives.' Indeed Rove is scarcely mentioned. There is not one indication that Bush's actions were based on personal political considerations or screened through his political advisers. This is a welcome contrast with the previous Clinton administration. Instead, all policy is shown to be a product of Bush's mindset that, in his own words, he should 'seize the opportunity to achieve big goals.' All Americans who are concerned for their futures should take some comfort to know that the President, rightly or wrongly, is sincerely determined to take the necessary action to preempt these grave dangers. Democrats who are convinced that Bush is a puppet of his right wing advisers or who ridicule him as an empty suit controlled by others should take heed or they will be sorry. It is just not so. Woodward has received a good deal of criticism because the book is not a 'hatchet job.' Because it does not expose wrongdoing or chicanery, some feel he has not done his job. Many have argued that Woodward's 'insider status' has made it impossible for him to objectively analyze his subjects for fear of losing that access. I find this to be quite unfair and a slander on this Pulitzer prize winning writer. Woodward's purpose is to reveal to the public, Bush the war leader. He clearly has no ax to grind with either side. Because of this the book is slightly bland but I believe it presents a true portrait of Bush for better or for worse. Mostly for better. As a Gore voter, I have never been so glad my candidate lost.
Rating:  - Journalism as Gossip
Woodward's intent was to provide a snapshot of the post-9/11 year of the Bush administration by talking to as many insiders as he could and recording their on-the-spot actions and observations. This "fly-on-the-wall" approach has its merits and drawbacks, especially as practiced in this book. On the plus side, he seems to have had quite extensive access to the major players, although apparently much of the verbatim quotes from high level meetings must have been reconstructed afterward by the parties. He does provide some sense of the personalities of these figures, and how they interact with each other. I had hoped the book might provide some clue as to the rationale behind the policy, and while there is some analysis, it is mainly "personality-based."
The limitations of this approach are readily evident: Woodward is careful not to step on anyone's toes, and one cannot help but wonder whther this is because everyone was acting as competently as he portrays them, or whether his reporting is designed to facilitate future access to this administration, widely viewed by the press as paranoid about negative images. If journalism is the first draft of history, then I suspect this book will not be deemed very useful a few years out. There is no analysis or critique of the administration, and everything they tell Woodward is taken at face value. Minute and unimportant troop deployments are covered in as much detail as much larger issues. The book seems like an effort to picture Bush as "in charge" and acting competently, without any reflection on the wisdom of the direction they are taking the country. As the book ends in late summer 1992, there is virtually nothing on how Iraq became Enemy No. 1, or the policy reasons behind that switch. And Woodward has an annoying fondness for the one-sentence paragraph.
All in all, of the eight or nine books I have read touching on 9/11 issues, this was the least satisfying, but it was certainly not totally devoid of value. As a useful counterpart on how a seemingly competent, in-charge administration, fueled on hubris and a willingness to assert American power, can get us into a load of trouble, Halberstram's "The Best and the Brightest" is worth a read. The trouble now is that this crew is neither the best nor the brightest.
Rating:  - Powell v Rumsfeld v Rice v CIA
To my surprise Bob Woodward has brought a fresh angle to perhaps the most reported event of our times. The angle is the variety of viewpoints, personalities and management styles among the President's senior advisory group. If you think Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney were calling the shots on US retaliatory policy, I suspect Woodward's work will change your mind. CIA chief George Tennent brought Bush what he wanted--a plan that could be implemented quickly and forcefully. Rumsfeld and the DOD were talking in terms of months while Bush was thinking in terms of days. Condoleeza Rice's role (and influence with the boss) was greater than I had thought. Bob Woodward seems to have sources that no one else has, plus an ability to intersperse historical perspective on the players in question. The George Bush in "Bush At War" bears no resemblence to the GWB of Saturday Night Live. The real Bush took charge, knew what he wanted to do and did it. Somewhat to my surprise I might add. This book is not a rehash; it provides a view into the White House inner circle that you won't get on the evening news or CNN.
|
