Yet again, the ideologues at the Defense Department ignored the experienced pragmatists at the State Department:
A yearlong State Department study predicted many of the problems that have plagued the American-led occupation of Iraq, according to internal State Department documents and interviews with administration and Congressional officials…
Several officials said that many of the findings in the $5 million study were ignored by Pentagon officials until recently, although the Pentagon said they took the findings into account...
The working group studying transitional justice was eerily prescient in forecasting the widespread looting in the aftermath of the fall of Mr. Hussein's government, caused in part by thousands of criminals set free from prison, and it recommended force to prevent the chaos…
The man overseeing the planning, Tom Warrick, a State Department official, so impressed aides to Jay Garner, a retired Army lieutenant general heading the military's reconstruction office, that they recruited Mr. Warrick to join their team…
But top Pentagon officials blocked Mr. Warrick's appointment, and much of the project's work was shelved, State Department officials said…
"[The report] was mostly ignored," said one senior defense official. "State has good ideas and a feel for the political landscape, but they're bad at implementing anything. Defense, on the other hand, is excellent at logistical stuff, but has blinders when it comes to policy. We needed to blend these two together…"
Among other things, the State Department study predicted that the Iraqis would not embrace American plans for rebuilding their society, that Iraq’s infrastructure would need massive reinvestment, and that disbanding the Iraqi military would lead to more unrest and attacks on American troops.
Sure, one of George W. Bush’s staunchest allies recently fantasized about getting
“a nuclear device inside Foggy Bottom,” but does that mean that
everybody in the White House has to ignore just about everything that comes out of the State Department?