America’s fixation on the foaming fury of the election contest briefly loosened yesterday for the 9/11 anniversary, and the man who chronicled how the White House embarked on two bloody conflicts since says that the next president will have a tarnished inheritance.

In an interview with The Times Bob Woodward, the author of four books on Mr Bush’s wars, said that the battles in Iraq and Afghanistan had in recent months “seemed a bit abstract” compared with the election fight.

“It’s not going to be abstract in January 2009 when the next president sits down in the Oval Office and asks what is the most pressing piece of business. He will know that the Iraq war is now his own.”

The commemoration felt like a throwback to the last election, which was dominated by the War on Terror. Even Donald Rumsfeld, the former Defence Secretary, was dusted down to speak at the dedication of a Pentagon memorial. Mr Bush, speaking at the same ceremony, reprised a line first delivered almost seven years ago, declaring that history would conclude that “we did not tire, we did not falter and we did not fail”.

Woodward, who helped to expose the Watergate scandal, quotes Mr Bush expressing the same sentiment in more fragile fashion on the final page of his book, The War Within, which is published this week. He had asked Mr Bush what advice he would give to his successor on Iraq. He replied: “Don’t let it fail.”

Woodward said: “This is not Winston Churchill, talking about a victory made of blood, sweat and tears. These are the words of someone with a much diminished expectation.

“But this war is not over. Bush thinks he has locked in his successor by putting General Petraeus and General Odierno in charge of Iraq. Now Obama wants to switch the emphasis to Afghanistan. It will be very interesting if he becomes president and starts being briefed by Petraeus and Odierno . . . because they believe Iraq must still be the most important front.”

Woodward’s view of Mr Bush has evolved from qualified admiration to one of barely varnished condemnation. “I never questioned his sincerity. He did not lie about going to war. But after he invaded Iraq there was this shift. He stopped telling the truth about how bad it was.”

He told The Times: “The commander-in-chief role is a sacred duty in the American Constitution. The obligation is one of total engagement, a clear-headed, clear-eyed examination of what is really going on.”

Woodward was shocked at evidence that Mr Bush mainly subcontracted the job of fixing Iraq to advisers and appeared unaware of from where recommendations on troop levels had come. The role of Mr Bush’s great ally, Tony Blair flickers inconsequentially across the books. Woodward said that the former Prime Minister exerted little influence “so far as I can tell”.

Times Recommends

• 'Lesbian' clinch to embarrass Berlusconi
• British embassy analyst faces prison sentence
• The woman who fell in love with an assassin