Eisenhower in War and Peace

Eisenhower in War and Peace by Jean Edward Smith

I recently read this author’s biography of Franklin Roosevelt that clocked in at 880 pages. I made the observation that even though 880 pages is an awful lot, it really didn’t seem enough when covering such a figure such as FDR.  Now that I’ve read Jean Edward Smith’s bio of Dwight Eisenhower that has 976 pages, I came away with the exact same conclusion.  For someone such as myself who studies a lot of history, it seemed as though this book was missing a lot of key moments from Eisenhower’s history and should have been a bit longer. But 976 pages is an awful lot, and it’s actually a testament that the author must be doing a great job when he devotes so many pages to his subject, yet as a reader, I wanted much more.

Although wanting more, I felt the author devoted an adequate amount of page space to the key parts of Ike’s life. There’s an acceptable time devoted to his early life, his life in the army (before and during WWII) and a very digestible synopsis of his eight years as President of the United States from 1952-1960. I’m not sure if it was the author’s intention, but “War and Peace” is actually a perfect title to describe Eisenhower. First, we all know of his service as General during World War II which would be the “war” part, but the “peace” probably alludes to his eight years as president. There are many that tend to look at Eisenhower’s tenure as president with slight skepticism stating that he never had to rule during times of extreme adversity (i.e. major war), yet Jean Edward Smith makes it very clear that it was Eisenhower and his governing policies that actually made this possible.  There were MANY times during 1952-1960 when the U.S. could have easily entered into yet another global conflict, but Ike made it a high priority to keep the U.S. out of such wars. He avoids potential wars with China, Vietnam, and Egypt just to name a few.  He’d been in a war. He saw what it was like. He made it a priority to keep his constituents out whenever and however possible.  He always succeeded. We should be thankful.

Fortunately, this book isn’t an instance of an author fawning over an idol.  I was surprised to read about the many instances (most during World War II) where the author points out many poor decisions that Eisenhower makes and how it negatively impacted many of the major battles, and even possibly prolonged the European conflict. Smith reminds us that, ironically, Eisenhower never participated in an actual battle before he was made a general in 1942.  This definitely hindered Ike in many instances. Eisenhower’s real strength, Smith tells us, is when Ike was a high-level commander.  Such a position, even in the military, involves a lot of politics and a lot coddling. Eisenhower had the rare gift of getting all of the leaders from the different allied nations to play nicely with each other in the sandbox. Such cooperation is crucial during a world war.

Such a leader is a perfect candidate to run a nation as Commander in Chief. Not surprisingly, both Democrats and Republicans want Ike to run in 1948; even current president Harry Truman who is up for re-election. (No one knew at the time whether Ike was a Republican or a Democrat.) The stars do align, though, in 1952, and Eisenhower begins an eight-year journey of quietly becoming one of the best presidents the U.S. has ever (or will ever have) seen.   He’s incredibly smart, often made major speeches extemporaneously, never gave a rip what other politicians nor voters thought of him and was always quick to acknowledge whenever he was wrong about something.  A president who admits his mistakes.  What a concept.

Although I’ve read many history books (including Stephen Ambrose’s bio of Ike), I really felt that I learned a lot of key things about Eisenhower that I had never been exposed to before.  Events in Eisenhower’s life such as Operation TORCH, the Suez Canal crises, and the CIA initiated coups of Iran and Guatemala are just a few events that get an adequate amount of attention in this biography.  The author has a very smooth delivery in his prose, and the reader never feels bored nor weighed down by useless statistics and inconsequential facts.

I would conclude this review with a cautious observation that the best thing that Eisenhower brought to the White House was the fact that he was not a career politician.  It’s nice to have such a high reputation that, as president, you could simply shrug your shoulders whenever high-profile members in congress disagree with you.  There were many times where it seemed the Democrats liked him more than his fellow Republicans.  Think about that for a minute. How often does that even happen?  Such credentials of being a political outsider don’t always guarantee success, though.  Herbert Hoover is a good example. So is Donald Trump. But let’s not go there.

I thoroughly enjoyed this biography. I enjoyed it better than the Stephen Ambrose volume, yet I really enjoyed that one as well.  I love biographers that point out the good, bad, and ugly of their subject matter, and after reading two biographies of well-known U.S. presidents by this author, I can honestly and sincerely say that Jean Edward Smith is a great biographer.

Side note: Jean Edward Smith also wrote a biography of Ulysses S. Grant, and Smith seems to have a peculiar infatuation with the Civil War hero.  I’m willing to bet there were at least 100 (seriously) comparisons and references to Grant in this book.  I haven’t read his bio of Grant yet, but I found it rather strange that the author would mention Grant as often as he did.  I guess I need to read the Grant bio as well.  One day….