Brent Scowcroft "Breaks Ranks" with George W. Bush

October 23, 2005 8:26 PM

Brent Scowcroft "Breaks Ranks" with George W. Bush
Longish excerpts from Jeffrey Goldberg's forthcoming article in The New Yorker.
posted by Kwantsar (18 comments total)

Well, given that a honest disagreement in this White House is considered to be "breaking ranks" or "being disloyal" I think we can safely say the Scowcroft broke ranks with W the moment he stopped believing that the war in Iraq was a good idea, no?
posted by clevershark at 8:35 PM on October 23, 2005

Yah, I thought Scowcroft "broke ranks" a few yars ago.
posted by troutfishing at 8:55 PM on October 23, 2005

One year ago: Scowcroft Is Critical of Bush; Ex-National Security Adviser Calls Iraq a 'Failing Venture'.

January: Scowcroft Skeptical Vote Will Stabilize Iraq; Friend of Bush Family Joins Pessimists

Aug. 15, 2002: Don't Attack Saddam (written up in the Guardian: "Adviser warns of 'Armageddon'")

Given this history, I am unsure when, precisely, this "breaking of ranks" occurred....

In any case, this looks to be a fascinating look at the decision-making within the administration, from the point of view of a knowledgeable outsider. Scowcroft is definitely still in the traditional Realist camp, unmoved by the more missionary neo-con take on foreign policy.
posted by dhartung at 8:59 PM on October 23, 2005

So it happened a while ago.. it's still happening today.
If there's one thing to be learned from the white house is, you message needs to be repeated loud and often if it is to be heard at all.

Somewhere around the 5-8000'th time people hear something like this, it may just sink in enough to make them think about it a bit.
posted by Balisong at 9:17 PM on October 23, 2005

More evidence of how insulated Bush is from the outside world:

Scowcroft's colleagues told me that he would have preferred to deliver his analysis privately to the White House. But Scowcroft, the apotheosis of a Washington insider, was by then definitively on the outside, and there was no one in the White House who would listen to him. On the face of it, this is remarkable: Scowcroft's best friend's son is the President; his friend Dick Cheney is the Vice-President; Condoleezza Rice, who was the national-security adviser, and is now the Secretary of State, was once a Scowcroft protege; and the current national-security adviser, Stephen Hadley, is another protege and a former principal at the Scowcroft Group.
posted by russilwvong at 9:52 PM on October 23, 2005

russilwvong -- I think it makes an interesting statement on the subject of loyalty, now, doesn't it... in a White House where fealty to the President is everything, it's interesting to see that the quality people who have provided sensible advice have on the whole tended to be unceremoniously tossed aside.
posted by clevershark at 10:17 PM on October 23, 2005

Here's a link to the interview with Jeff Goldberg in this week's New Yorker. It's weird to me that the neo-cons like Wolfowitz are being labeled as "liberal idealists" in contrast to Scowcroft's "realism." I disagree. The neo-con's did not pursue regime change in Iraq to liberate the frequently gassed Kurds or to unveil the Muslim women or because of any other humanitarian concerns. Rather their goals were to protect the integrity of Israel from the scud launching menace, and to put us in control of Iraq's oil reserves. And maybe drum up some business for Haliburton while they were at it. So to me it's clear who the true "realists" are, and the reason they didn't consult Scowcroft of anyone else with a dissenting opinion was because they were acting in bad faith.
posted by mert at 10:46 PM on October 23, 2005

It's very sad when, by comparison to the Bush 43 Adminstration, members of the Bush 41 Adminstration seem very reasonable and right-thinking.
posted by mullacc at 12:17 AM on October 24, 2005

It's very sad when, by comparison to the Bush 43 Adminstration, members of the Bush 41 Adminstration seem very reasonable and right-thinking.

i always figured that was really the point of the bush 43 administration...to take it to such an extreme that anything less seems a reasonable compromise
posted by troybob at 12:25 AM on October 24, 2005

Well it seems the New Yorker is hard to come by in the UK. I just scoured Oxford for it and found only the October 3 edition. Bah.
posted by snoktruix at 3:32 AM on October 24, 2005

Oh, it's not out yet. No wonder.
posted by snoktruix at 4:07 AM on October 24, 2005

My "favorite" (by which I mean, most Schadenfreude-inducing) quote from the link:

"She [Condoleezza Rice] said, 'How could you do this to us?'" a Scowcroft friend recalled. "What bothered Brent more than Condi yelling at him was the fact that here she is, the national-security adviser, and she's not interested in hearing what a former national-security adviser had to say." [emphasis mine]

And to think that now she's moved on to being Secretary of State, the vicar of this Administration's foreign policy...
posted by alumshubby at 7:10 AM on October 24, 2005

i always figured that was really the point of the bush 43 administration...to take it to such an extreme that anything less seems a reasonable compromise

I've thought similar things about a number of exceptionally partisan idealogues, but I'm not convinced that the theory is correct. It's comforting to think that nobody could actually disagree with your world view so thoroughly or completely, but this doesn't make it so.

The true diversity of opinion is as fascinating as it is intimidating.
posted by I Love Tacos at 7:18 AM on October 24, 2005

Mr. Scowcroft, do you wish you had told America this before the election?
posted by Aknaton at 8:51 AM on October 24, 2005

He did: Don't Attack Saddam, Wall Street Journal, August 15, 2002.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:17 AM on October 24, 2005

Reality is over here, and Bush 43 (the team) is over there... and never the twain shall meet.
posted by clevershark at 1:12 PM on October 24, 2005

fart gas
posted by snoktruix at 1:14 PM on October 25, 2005

Here's the article.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:51 AM on November 2, 2005