Ties to GOP Trumped Know-How Among Staff Sent to Rebuild Iraq

Washington Post ^ | 09/17/2006 | Rajiv Chandrasekaran

[CharlesWayneCT]

After the fall of Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003, the opportunity to participate in the U.S.-led effort to reconstruct Iraq attracted all manner of Americans -- restless professionals, Arabic-speaking academics, development specialists and war-zone adventurers. But before they could go to Baghdad, they had to get past Jim O'Beirne's office in the Pentagon.

To pass muster with O'Beirne, a political appointee who screens prospective political appointees for Defense Department posts, applicants didn't need to be experts in the Middle East or in post-conflict reconstruction. What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.

(snip)

Interviews with scores of former CPA personnel over the past two years depict an organization that was dominated -- and ultimately hobbled -- by administration ideologues.

"We didn't tap -- and it should have started from the White House on down -- just didn't tap the right people to do this job," said Frederick Smith, who served as the deputy director of the CPA's Washington office. "It was a tough, tough job. Instead we got people who went out there because of their political leanings."

(snip)

By the time Bremer departed in June 2004, Iraq was in a precarious state. The Iraqi army, which had been dissolved and refashioned by the CPA, was one-third the size he had pledged it would be. Seventy percent of police officers had not been screened or trained. Electricity generation was far below what Bremer had promised to achieve.

[CharlesWayneCT]

I'd love to see a discussion of the charges made by this author. I've often felt that Bremer and the CPA were the major cause of the trouble we had in Iraq. If half of what is in this book (the article is an excerpt from the book) is true, it seems clear that our government served in it's usual imcompetent way, rewarding political partners rather than picking the best people for what was going to be a very hard job.

But does this book reflect the truth? And can we discuss possible failings without it turning into a political brawl (meaning will democrats simply grab this and use it to bash republicans again, instead of learning from it)?

[ozzymandus]

Golly, a leading MSM newspaper bitching about how the Bush administration has handled Iraq! Who'da thunk it??

Nice name, Rajiv.

[Seruzawa]

Everyone knows that the Demons are far less corrupt. Prez's like Clowntoon never played political favorites. (sarc off)

[JennysCool]

What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.

Yeah. What we should have had is a bunch of malcontents who hate the boss. That's apparently the WaPo Way.

[Axhandle]

I think we royally screwed the pooch regarding the work of the CPA and the general coherence of our mission after the regime fell, but I really don't see a big issue here regarding the hiring practices.

The obvious slant of the author is to insinuate that political loyalty/affiliation was the predominant or only criterion on which applicants were screened. I find it difficult to believe that qualifications and enthusiasm were not taken into account. Sure, some young folks with little experience probably were pegged, but really, how many people had experience that was relevant to the mission in Iraq at the time? Had I been the guy doing the screening, I probably would have placed greater weight upon new people, new ideas, young enthusiasm, and so on, just as the author insinuates that O'Beirne did.

In my opinion, our actions in Iraq, especially Baghdad, were totally incoherent and lacking any central direction in 2003. Rules regarding law and order varied from sector to sector throughout Baghdad because junior officers were establishing order with little to no guidance from their higher headquarters. Those were the youngest and most inexperienced officers on the battlefield, but they were the ones working to unscrew the situation while higher ups sat back in the palaces and in the compounds at Baghdad International Airport, smoking cigars, doing photo ops, and patting each other on the back for having so thoroughly defeated a conventional Arab military force. Age and experience sure paid off there, didn't it? I'll take a bunch of young, enthusiastic guys over a bunch of fossilized entrenched bureaucrats anyday.

[rhombus]

What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.

I wish they'd done more of this.

[MNJohnnie]

What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.

Seems to me this guy took events, slapped his own preconceived opinions on them and claim it as "Fact".

Seem pretty obvious just another Mikey Moore style hit piece where facts are misrepresented or only half reported to present a fraudulent view. East to spot these.

Life is a bell curve, when ever anything falls WAY over onto one end or the other it is more about propaganda then fact.

[Cicero]

"We didn't tap -- and it should have started from the White House on down -- just didn't tap the right people to do this job," said Frederick Smith, who served as the deputy director of the CPA's Washington office. "It was a tough, tough job. Instead we got people who went out there because of their political leanings."

This sounds like a cart full of manure.

In the first place, does anyone think clinton didn't award contracts to his friends and donors? Anyone? Did the ComPost ever object when he did it?

In the second place, does anyone believe that the real experts in training the Iraqi army, "a tough tough job," are to be found among the liberals? Maybe at the Pacifica Institute? or on Teddy Kennedy's staff?

As we often had to point out at the time, Halliburton is the only outfit that could do many of the jobs that needed to be done, and army trainers are likelier to be found among conservative patriots than liberal refuseniks.

[SteveMcKing]

"Rajiv"

[mewzilla]

Re: Mr. Chandrasekaran...

Fitzgerald: The Post's Arab media dhimmitude

[MNJohnnie]

Hey Allegra;

You been there, done that, got the pictures. What do you think of this piece?

[MissAmericanPie]

Aw, isn't it such a shame for this to be going on when things would be so much better with unsullied Demonrats running things?

We could have the Clinton's running things, smooth as glass, pure as the driven snow, defecating on the Oval Office Carpet...what the heck is wrong with us? Prolly that silly old common sense.

[IncPen]

Yeah. What we should have had is a bunch of malcontents who hate the boss.

State and the CIA are rife with communist-sympathizers- they're the ones behind the undoing of Nixon.

The instinct to get sympathetic people on the ground was right, even if the execution was flawed.

As it is, I don't recall anyone questioning Clinton's hiring practices.

[Piranha]

He discarded applications from those his staff deemed ideologically suspect, even if the applicants possessed Arabic language skills

Gee, he should have filled his staff with ideologically suspect Arabic speakers.

It seems to me that, to the extent this story is true, it represents an effort by the Pentagon to minimize the damage caused by the ideological slant of Colin Powell's State Department, which tossed out Jay Garner (the Pentagon's appointee to oversee Iraq's reconstruction) and demonized Ahmad Chalabi (who also had ties to the Pentagon).

President Bush never, ever should have selected Colin Powell for anything.

[MNJohnnie]

Age and experience sure paid off there, didn't it? I'll take a bunch of young, enthusiastic guys over a bunch of fossilized entrenched bureaucrats anyday.

Ultra mega dittos. Just where did all these supposed "experts" that were passed over according to this clown GET their experience rebuilding a Arab state after 40 years of repressive one man rule?

So we were suppose to tap the same Leftist elitist from the UN who screwed up everything they have touched for Iraq?

"Experience" in these matters often means "We are really really good at screwing up the same way as often as the Americans will pay for it"

[Condor51]

Frederick Smith, who served as the deputy director of the CPA's Washington office. "It was a tough, tough job. Instead we got people who went out there because of their political leanings."

Uh, yeah Frederick. I guess we should have sent a bunch of pansy a$$, I feel your pain, sit around and sing Kumbaya, bleeding heart, mush headed liberal DEMOCRATS from the ranks of the DU and Daily Kos - all who last I checked, just happen to HATE Bush, to do that "tough, tough job".

Yeah that would have worked out much better. 'Peace Mom' Cindy 'Poop For Brains' could have been Activities Director and Code Pink volunteers could have screened new Army recruits.

[vaudine]

Where was WaPo when Clinton fired EVERY fed atty nationwide?

vaudine

[VictoryGal]

> In the first place, does anyone think clinton didn't award contracts to his friends and donors? Anyone? Did the ComPost ever object when he did it?

Is something OK because Clinton got away with it?

> In the second place, does anyone believe that the real experts in training the Iraqi army, "a tough tough job," are to be found among the liberals? Maybe at the Pacifica Institute? or on Teddy Kennedy's staff?

I'm pretty sure there was a competent conservative out there to help rebuild the Iraqi stock exchange, at least someone more qualified than a 24 year old real estate agent with no background in finance.

Just sayin'.

[CharlesWayneCT]

It was that example that really got to me. If it is true, it certainly sounds like we didn't do everything we could to try to make this work.

I remember being upset when Garner was yanked, I believe because the state department thought we needed a more "civilian" look -- which got us Bremer.

How much of this was state department interference? After all, most foreign state department posts seem to be filled through political cronyism.

[Cicero]

No, I'm not saying they did a perfect job. I'm just wondering why the press only runs this kind of story when Republicans are involved.

I hate to say it, but when did the government bureaucracy ever come up with the best people to do the job, except occasionally? It doesn't excuse them, but in a massive government operation like this, mistakes are bound to be made.

"I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."

Bush has appointed cronies here and there in his administration. But compared to clinton's cabinet, which only included one competent member during his whole eight years in office, Bush has done relatively well. (That one was Rubin, who was corrupt but at least competent.)

Moreover, I'm the one who has constantly criticized him in the forum for not doing more to weed out the clintonoids at high levels in the CIA, FBI and elsewhere, which are clearly the worst personnel problem.

[kenavi]

Getting sent to Iraq must have been a real political plum.

[ikez78]

This story is pure BS.
I know Larry Diamond, Lydia Khalil and others who worked there and told me of the anti-Bushies who were working over there.

Pure bullshit.

[VictoryGal]

> No, I'm not saying they did a perfect job. I'm just wondering why the press only runs this kind of story when Republicans are involved.

Well, this is pretty blatant. I know Clinton's appointees were incompetent, but they at least had some credentials that sounded reasonable on paper. But-- OMG, a recent grad with no background in accounting tapped to handle a $13 Billion (that's "B" as is "B"loated ) budget? Dang.

It's regrettable that the reporter is a WaPo simp. I would rather it be reported by someone who is interested in constructively learning from mistakes instead of wanting to beat up their political rivals. But I would also rather it be reported rather than it remaining unknown-- you never get rid of the vermin in your house unless you're willing to acknowledge the chewing and rustling sounds in the walls.

I'd never last in Washington-- I'd become unpopular fast with all the firing of incompetents I'd do. Starting with the glad-handing boobs who do the hiring based on whose butt was kissed rather than merit.

It just makes me furious... I'd like to think that the money torn from my bank account to plump up the government actually get things *done*. Ya know?

[Cicero]

Well, I won't argue with you. I suspect that if you combed through any large government project, you would find plenty of incompetents. You'd just have to find one of the worst and write it up.

The same in war. The allies fought the Second World War for the most part with great competence, and there were really plenty of geniuses, such as Patton and MacArthur. But if you comb through all the officers, you can still find incompetents, people promoted beyond their abilities because of their connections. So it depends where you choose to focus the story.

[Hot Tabasco]

But does this book reflect the truth? And can we discuss possible failings without it turning into a political brawl (meaning will democrats simply grab this and use it to bash republicans again, instead of learning from it)?

Ask Alegra, she should be able to answer your questions.....Personally I think the article is complete bullship since there were all kinds of companies assigned to Iraq for the reconstruction and none of them connected to the whitehouse.........

[ikez78]

and our "patriotic" msm ALWAYS choose the anti-Bush side.

[Enchante]

Slow down..... if you believe anything presented as "fact" in a WaPo hit job like this then you truly have a lot to learn. Maybe these anecdotes are accurate, maybe most are not, maybe there are some grains of fact scattered among the author's tendentious ranting..... but let's remember that not only this author (who has written total steaming piles of lib crap in the past), and his paper, but also the people who were likely to express their criticisms to him have a left-leaning agenda.

I don't doubt that there are plenty of things to criticize about the CPA, obviously, but this smells of the usual liberal smear-job.

btw, Republicans should be better and more competent, no doubt, but let's not ignore that every international project dominated by Demagogue/UN/EU types will have its own agenda and that there may be plenty of sour grapes here from people of the liberal socialist State Dept. variety who weren't able to have free rein to do things their way.

Also, I would not assume that the inexperienced 24 years olds cited were really "in charge" of (as opposed to merely on the staff for) entire projects like the Iraqi Stock Exchange or a "13 billion dollar budget"..... maybe, but I'd want to see a lot more corroboration that the charlatans at WaPo before I'd believe it.

[kenavi]

Thanks, first hand experiences are worth hearing.

We know an ex-Marine who worked under Bremer on the Iraqi infrastructure. He gave up a cushy life to work there, and spoke respectfully of the Iraqis under him.

[ikez78]

I can't speak of everyone but these two people worked in the CPA, among many others I've talked to.

These people certainly weren't Bush cronies in any way. The way they depicted things to me, their coworkers weren't either.

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

See Ramesh Ponnuru

[Enchante]

FYI, there are comments on NRO today indicating just what I suspected, that the WaPo article is a ridiculous hit-piece written in ignorance and utilizing distorted, fabricated, and/or tendentious claims:

---

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGFlNGY3NDU0ZWI5YTQzMzJiMTEyMzY3MDIyMzZmNWY=

Imperial Farce [Ramesh Ponnuru]

(Full disclosure note: Jim O’Beirne is a friend, as is his wife, my colleague Kate O’Beirne.)


Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s front-pager in yesterday’s Washington Post, about how Jim O’Beirne allegedly hired Bush loyalists over experts to staff the Iraqi occupation, was a hit piece, pure and simple: thinly sourced, fantastic in parts, and propagandistic. Note, for instance, the photo accompanying the story. It shows two “U.S. troops” relaxing in a swimming pool in the Green Zone, where, according to the caption, “many Coalition Provisional Authority officials spent their days.” (In the pool?) This has nothing at all to do with Chandrasekaran’s thesis—O’Beirne, even on the reporter’s account, was in charge of political appointees, not the R&R of troops. But the implication is clear: O’Beirne was sending these political appointees to cushy jobs in Iraq. The article is excerpted from a book titled Imperial Life in the Emerald City.


Chandrasekaran repeats some of the innuendo of earlier iterations of the Iraq-cronyism charge, notably the claim that “the daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator” was “tapped to manage Iraq’s $13 billion budget,” even though she had no “background in accounting.” That’s a double lie: The woman in question, also a friend of mine, does have a background in accounting, and she wasn’t managing the budget.


To get to the main point of the article: O’Beirne wasn’t in charge of staffing the Coalition Provisional Authority; he didn’t have a “staff” of his own, let alone one that could ask crudely political questions of applicants; he didn’t ask anyone he interviewed about his views on Roe v. Wade (a claim that, careful readers will see, Chandrasekaran doesn’t quite tie to O’Beirne); he was eager to find Arabic speakers; and he has never been deluged with job applicants who opposed the Iraq war and the Bush administration but wanted to serve in a war zone (surprise, surprise). Much of the article recapitulates the well-known rivalry between the State Department and the Pentagon (where O’Beirne works), with some extra bitterness added by Fred Smith, a CPA official who was forced out. Great story otherwise!


The bloggers who have decided they believe the Post’s account—some of whom distrust the Post in general—don’t know a thing about O’Beirne, but are happy to accept the veracity of an account that gibes so well with all of their prejudices.
Posted at 11:05 AM

[Cicero]

Thanks for the update.

[Allegra]

You been there, done that, got the pictures. What do you think of this piece?

From about the first sentence, I was gagging on the spin. Then, I looked at the source and it was all clear.

I personally think the article is chock-full of horse-hockey. The negative slant and blatant exaggerations are hard to miss.

I'll be back in Iraq at the end of the month where I can get the real story again instead of the steady diet of distortion I have been fed by the media on my brief (but delightful!) sojourn back to the States.