Bob Woodward’s latest travelogue through the minds of the powerful, “Bush
at War,” has been widely praised as a compelling account of the Bush
administration post-9/11.
The book is, in one sense, quite an accomplishment: Woodward manages to
make the subject boring. He takes events of incredible significance -- the
9/11 attack and the U.S. response to it -- and weighs them down with so
much trivia drenched in naiveté that I found myself struggling to stay awake.
As I faded in and out of consciousness while reading, I imagined the
following, rendered in Woodwardesque prose:
Robert Jensen walked into the conference room with his dogeared copy of
“Bush at War” and laid it on the mahogany table next to the manila folder
that held the talking points he had rushed to finish before the meeting. He
knew the revisions, made right up to the last second, had been hard on his
staff, but this was a meeting with the president, with all the principals.
Everyone knew what was at stake.
Jensen knew the president would expect him to have answers, not just
questions, about the importance of the book by Bob Woodward, the Washington
Post’s star reporter.
But, Jensen pondered, was Woodward really just a reporter? Or had
circumstances changed the once scrappy guy from the metro desk who had
broken the Watergate story wide open? Was Woodward something more? A
first-draft historian? A meta-journalist? Jensen knew the president would
want an assessment, and he knew that he would be on the spot.
Bush leaned forward in his chair; it was time for the meeting to start.
There was only one item on the agenda for this meeting: assessing this
bestseller that was flying off the bookstore shelves across America. Bush
wanted to know: What was the fallout for the war? Did the American people
understand the task his administration faced? Was Woodward’s book going to
derail the strategy the president had approved? It was a good strategy, all
the principals agreed. But where were the weak spots? The president needed
answers, and -- as always -- the president wanted them now. And he wanted a
hamburger. The steward on duty was dispatched. National Security Adviser
Condoleezza Rice suggested they get started.
Around the table were Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld, Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet, and White
House Chief of Staff Andrew Card. And, of course, Condi. She had been
nervous about the meeting, worrying that the attention being paid to “Bush
at War” was distracting the president. He was being pulled in different
directions, and it was her job to keep him from being pulled apart.
After the last National Security Council meeting, her job was getting
harder. Rumsfeld had proposed that the next phase of the war on terrorism
should be a massive attack on Cuba to expand the U.S. base at Guantanamo
Bay to the whole island -- a three-day air campaign followed by
boots-on-the-ground. Cheney had liked the plan, and Tenet had said his
paramilitary teams were ready to work with the Special Forces units that
would take the lead.
Powell had been visibly shaken by the proposal. He had known Rumsfeld was
itching to expand the war quickly, but he couldn’t believe the secretary of
defense would push for a strategy that rash. Powell had no doubt Castro had
links to al-Qaeda, but he thought the case needed to be nailed down. He
didn’t trust the HUMINT (human intelligence) coming from the CIA that
suggested Castro and bin Laden had once ordered camping gear -- including,
crucially, a two-burner propane stove -- from the same web site. Did they
have the SIGINT (signals intelligence) to back it up? How could he take
such sketchy evidence to foreign leaders? Sure, the British would buy it,
but it would be a hard sell everywhere else. The French likely would block
a Security Council resolution. Powell was putting out the fires in his mind
before Rumsfeld could finish the proposal. Castro needed to go, but was
this the way? Powell had been skeptical from the start.
Meanwhile, Bush had moved on: “Yes, we can do Cuba. And we should. Castro
is evil. He has done evil. He is an evildoer. So let’s do it. I want
something on paper in three days. All options laid out, with minimal
civilian casualties. Remember, we do good, not evil.”
Bush had ended that meeting by looking straight at Rice: “Now, what about
Woodward’s book?” The principals weren’t eager to take it on, but Rice knew
the president wanted to confront it head on.
That’s where Jensen came in. He came into this without connections to any
of the principals. He could lay out the case and let the others react. Rice
knew it would be touchy, but she had to take the chance. She scheduled
Jensen for the next NSC meeting.
Now Rice was impatient to get it over with. “Professor Jensen, please
begin,” she said.
Jensen explained that much of the furor over the book had been about the
access Woodward had been given -- to notes from NSC meetings and to the
thinking of the principals. Had important intelligence sources been
compromised? Jensen told the president not to worry. There was virtually
nothing of interest about policy or strategy in the book. For all the
breathless prose suggesting that Woodward was revealing the real truth
about the planning for the war in Afghanistan, the book was empty. It
simply regurgitated the same claims about the war that the administration
had offered to the public at the time, only with the pretense that Woodward
had tapped into the real thinking of the leadership.
Jensen assured the president that Woodward seemed to believe that all the
administration officials were basically telling the truth. When they said
the attack on Afghanistan was about ending terrorism, Woodward apparently
believed them. There was no indication in the book that Woodward understood
the war was part of an imperial project to extend and deepen the dominance
of the United States, around the world and in the crucial resource-rich
arenas of the Middle East and Central Asia.
Jensen knew that wasn’t the president’s only concern. What about Woodward’s
revelations of tensions among key advisers, and the possibility some of
those advisers had cooperated with Woodward to gain political advantage?
Had Woodward punished Rumsfeld and rewarded Powell based on how much
information each had given? Was the book fair to Cheney? Jensen again
assured the president that Woodward was such a sycophant that even the
treatment of Rumsfeld, who was portrayed somewhat less sympathetically,
gave the impression that the secretary of defense was working 24/7 for
justice and freedom. Jensen cut to the chase.
“It’s a slam dunk,” he told the president, remembering that Rice had told
him that Bush preferred sports metaphors. “The underlying message of “Bush
at War” is that your administration is made up of decent, hard-working
folks who -- no matter what their differences in personality, ideology or
strategy -- in the end do what is best for the country and the suffering
people of the world.”
Bush looked relieved, but there was another question hanging in the air.
Jensen knew the president wouldn’t ask it, but he knew it was his job to
answer it.
“I know it doesn’t matter to you, Mr. President, but with your permission I
would like to assess the effect of the book on your approval ratings,”
Jensen said.
Bush winced ever so slightly. He was, of course, curious, and before 9/11
it might have been one of his central questions. But 9/11 had changed the
president, changed the man. He knew political considerations mattered if he
were to succeed in pushing through his domestic agenda. But he also knew
that he couldn’t think politically the way he once had. He was the
president in a new age, and he couldn’t look back.
“Go ahead,” Bush said. “But make it quick. We have a war against terrorism
to win.”
Jensen wasted no words. “You come out looking like a leader. A gut player
who can think on his feet. A man not afraid to push his subordinates but
also willing to trust their judgment. A man who, when the pressure is on,
isn’t afraid to take chances, but who knows when to be cautious when lives
are at stake. A man who grew into the job but never lost his Texas instincts.”
And, Jensen said, “A man not afraid to ask for a hamburger when he’s hungry.”
Bush smiled. “Where I come from, a man’s not a man if he’s afraid to ask
for a hamburger when he’s hungry.”
That instantly changed the mood of the meeting. Powell looked over at
Rumsfeld, and the two laughed. Powell quickly wrote on a note card --
“Let’s get (Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul) Wolfowitz and (Deputy
Secretary of State Richard) Armitage and go get a burger tonight” -- and
pushed it to Rumsfeld, who flashed a thumbs-up. Cheney, reading their
minds, said, “Put me down for take-out. I have to get back to my
undisclosed location.” They all laughed until they stopped.
Rice breathed a sigh of relief. Let the boys go out for burgers -- they
need to blow off some steam, she thought. She was already sketching her
evening: a salad and brief walk to clear her head, and then back to work on
Cuba. She still had to nail down the number of fuel cylinders Castro had
ordered for the camp stove, and there were some disturbing reports out of
Prague that the Cubans had found a way to synthesize plutonium from propane.
Robert Jensen is an associate professor of journalism at the University of
Texas at Austin, a member of the Nowar Collective, and author of the book
Writing Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the Mainstream
and the pamphlet “Citizens of the Empire.” He can be reached at
rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu.
###