My contribution to the Ricks fan club
Please do check out Foreign Policy’s Book Club discussion of Tom Ricks’ The Gamble, his excellent and contrarian follow-up to Fiasco. Here’s a link to Marc Lynch’s take, and that is followed by Christian Brose. My take just went up. The point I want to stress: [T]he ways in which the architects of the surge ...
Please do check out Foreign Policy's Book Club discussion of Tom Ricks' The Gamble, his excellent and contrarian follow-up to Fiasco. Here's a link to Marc Lynch's take, and that is followed by Christian Brose.
Please do check out Foreign Policy’s Book Club discussion of Tom Ricks’ The Gamble, his excellent and contrarian follow-up to Fiasco. Here’s a link to Marc Lynch’s take, and that is followed by Christian Brose.
My take just went up. The point I want to stress:
[T]he ways in which the architects of the surge got their way seems like an exact replay of how the architects of the invasion and initial occupation got their way — operating through bureaucratic backchannels and endruns, ideologically simpatico think tanks, and — of course — Dick Cheney’s office. For those of us who want the policymaking process to work, this looks like another fiasco. Petraeus’s decision to co-opt the Sunni insurgents, for example, was made without consulting the president. Doesn’t that echo J. Paul Bremer’s disastrous decision to disband the Iraqi military without consultation? Petraeus, Odierno, and Jack Keane might have been right on the merits, but to get their way they bypassed the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CENTCOM commander, the State Department, and the NSC interagency process. The Gamble argues that these actors were impediments to the right strategy. All well and good, but what is to stop another cluster of bureaucratic "insurgents" from bypassing the chain of command and telling political leaders what they want to hear on, say, Afghanistan, North Korea or Iran? Is there a need for another, more ambitious version of Goldwater-Nichols?
Go check it out — and Ricks will respond to all of these comments at the end of the week.
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy
Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.
The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.
Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.
How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
