Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq by Thomas E. Ricks
Saturday, 09 Sep 2006 11:59
Thomas E. Ricks gives his damning appraisal of the Iraq war
Published by Allen Lane, out now, hardback, 465 pages, £25
In a nutshell…
Damning. Incompetence. Infighting. War. Iraq.
What's it all about?
Fiasco tells the story of how the Bush administration planned and executed the 2003 invasion of Iraq. As the title suggests, author Thomas E Ricks has been an outspoken critic, not just of the decision to go to war, but also how the war and especially the occupation were planned and executed.
His central argument is that all of the preparation by defence department officials and Donald Rumsfeld himself was based on a best case scenario. Little or no thought was given to what would happen if post-war Iraq failed to turn out exactly as the administration hoped.
Starting with the first Gulf War and the policy of containment, Ricks looks at how September 11th propelled members of the administration, such as Paul Wolfowitz, who had wanted to overthrow Saddam Hussein in 1991, to the fore. He examines the invasion itself and the occupation right up to earlier this year.
Looking to the future, Ricks portrays an Iraq spiralling towards civil war, which he warns could even spill over to neighbouring countries. His nightmare scenario is a regional war leading to the emergence of a modern day Saladin, who would unite the Arab world draw the west into a major larger conflict.
Who's it by?
Thomas E Ricks is a highly-regarded military correspondent for the Washington Post, who has been a member of two Pulitzer prize-winning writing teams. He also authored Making the Corps, which follows a group of marine recruits through boot camp and the novel A Soldier's Duty.
As an example…
On the war plan: "almost no Middle Eastern experts in the military were consulted… in part because the plan was produced on a very close hold basis that involved few people and even then, only parts of it were shown to most of the people involved."
On Congress: "in previous wars, Congress has been populated by hawks and doves. But as war in Iraq loomed it seemed to consist mainly of lambs who hardly made a peep."
On the occupation: "because the Pentagon assumed that US troops would be treated as liberators and that an Iraqi government would be stood up quickly, it didn't plan seriously for less rosy scenarios."
On the future: "the US experience in Iraq may come to resemble that of yet another western-style military's attempt to pacify an Arab population: Israel's painful 18-year occupation of parts of southern Lebanon."
Likelihood of becoming a Hollywood blockbuster
If Al Gore can be a movie star, then who knows? There is certainly plenty of combustible material and a narrative that at times would rival a Hollywood script. Kirk Douglas as Donald Rumsfeld anyone?
What the others say
"A thorough and devastating history of the war in Iraq from the planning stages through the continued insurgency in early 2006… he [Ricks] does not shy away from naming those he finds responsible." Tom Nissley, Amazon.com
"Absolutely essential reading for anyone interested in understanding how the United States came to go to war in Iraq, how a bungled occupation fed a ballooning insurgency and how these events will affect the future of the American military." Michiko Kakutani, New York Times
So is it any good?
There has been a lot said and perhaps even more written about the 2003 invasion of Iraq and its subsequent occupation, but few accounts offer such a fascinating insight. Ricks has developed top level contacts in the military during his time as a Pentagon correspondent and it is their contributions that provide the backbone of his book.
Fiasco is a damning account of how the invasion and occupation were planned. Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and other civilian planners are heavily criticised for ignoring or overruling senior members of the armed forces, but Ricks never lets his condemnation descend into a populist rant.
Instead, he portrays an administration not only determined to go to war, but determined to do so on its own terms. Despite what senior military figures were telling them, Rumsfeld and his staff took crucial decisions about troop numbers and tactics, pressing ahead with a super-light invasion force.
Ricks argues that while poor planning was never going to result in the US-led coalition losing the war, it certainly contributed to the difficulties that the soldiers on the ground have faced since the occupation began. From disbanding the Iraqi army to counterproductive containment tactics, Ricks claims that flawed planning and poor decision-making have created the situation coalition troops now face on the ground.
Whether you agreed with the decision to invade Iraq or not, this is an informative and at times shocking account of the political and militaristic backdrop to one of the most divisive events of the 21st century. Ricks has access to the key people outside of the administration and wisely allows them to set out the arguments for him. It leaves the reader wondering what on earth the US-led coalition should do next and in little doubt that fiasco is just the word to describe the last three years.
inthenews.co.uk
"Agree with the review contents, but would like to see more information naming persons involved with this 'Fiasco'." - Mike Cooper
Agree with this review? Have a different opinion? Let us know your thoughts (without being too abusive to our poor reviewers please) and we'll post the best ones on the site.
Write your comments below: