Exclusive: A General Disappointment
by TIM WILSON
June 24, 2010
I wonder if Michael Hastings is proud of damaging American interests? For that is what his story on “The Runaway General” Stanley McChrystal has done as surely as a bomb detonating in Times Square. It is almost irrelevant that Gen McChrystal left himself open to this firestorm of criticism. The damage is done. Never mind that the article contains few quotes from the General himself, and none which should worry a hardened politician. Never mind that the author has linked diverse comments, quotes and other reporting to create an image which may or may not be true. Never mind that the Commander-in-Chief has done nothing to earn the respect or support of his hand-picked and undoubtedly heroic Theatre Commander. General McChrystal should go, he must go and, who knows, maybe he even wants to go?
There can be no doubt, as one reads the
article which started this firestorm, that General McChrystal has less than complete respect for Barack Obama or any of his staff. The attitude of his military staff undoubtedly reflects the opinions of their boss. But this should come as no surprise to anyone. As I wrote in
February 2009, the broken promises by the current President boded ill for his prospects of showing great leadership, especially to the military. As a wartime leader, he has spent far more time on the golf course than he has with the General whom he selected to conduct the war for him.
President Obama waited months before even meeting with General McChrystal and later took months more to make the decision to support the surge requested by General McChrystal after a detailed study of necessary force levels – months during which casualties mounted, casualties which the General undoubtedly felt deeply. Since then the President has apparently continued to communicate only sporadically, usually through intermediaries, and never made any obvious attempt at establishing a personal relationship.
Furthermore President Obama’s choices for other senior figures to cooperate with General McChrystal in waging the war in Afghanistan have seemed more political payoff than inspiringly effective. Richard Holbrooke has a less than stellar record of achievement, no matter how hard his “successes” are spun, while the choice of Ambassador Eikenberry to lead the diplomatic mission in Afghanistan is, as the New York Times put it, “highly unusual”. As a retired Lieutenant General himself, his diplomatic credentials at such a high level are few, which might explain his intemperate intolerance for Hamid Karzai, while his ability to second guess the Theatre Commander professionally was always likely to cause conflict within the US hierarchy.
It is not impossible that the frustration General McChrystal obviously feels in dealing with the politics and politicians involved in fighting the war in Afghanistan led him, consciously or subconsciously, to be so indiscrete. Why President Obama or Vice-President Biden should be surprised or disappointed by this is also incomprehensible. They selected a General known for his fighting ability, his forthright approach to combat and his uncompromising dedication to achieving his mission. General McChrystal was obviously unhappy at the way his reasoned and well-researched request for additional troops for the surge was prevaricated over. He continued throughout that months long process to push, hard, for his requests to be met. He accepted a compromise of less than he had asked for with, for someone like him, tact and grace.
Meanwhile Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, an ardent McChrystal supporter, has also proven to be one of the most steadfast and understanding of the high level figures involved in the conflict. It would seem that she, at least, understood the value of the opinions of such a highly experienced and respected military commander. It also appears that she understood how to communicate with a forceful, blunt General and to persuade rather than order around a man who knows more about the mission and how to achieve it than almost any other, even going out of her way to visit with him in Afghanistan a few months after he took command. In contrast President Obama finally condescended to visit “his” war only after a year in office. Sadly, the Commander-in-Chief apparently continued, despite his grand words about the importance of the war in Afghanistan, to mostly shun his Theatre Commander, preferring instead to take holidays and time on the golf course.
Now President Obama has the unenviable task of appointing a successor. Undoubtedly there will be a few ambitious candidates lining up for the role. But they will be taking on a role in which they are already cast as “second best”, as General McChrystal is widely recognized as the best man for the job. The President now has to find a competent replacement, yet the replacement will have to face an almost impossible task, starting under adverse conditions, and will have to be more of a yes man and diplomat in order to avoid repeating the same canard of speaking truth about circumstances and personalities, at least where any press might hear.
Perhaps this will, at least, result in a reconsideration of the present policy of press access – and if it does it will be a good thing. While there is no doubt that a free press is a wonderful thing, unrestricted access has its limits as this case shows. Unrestricted access places a requirement on those journalists granted such privilege (and it is a privilege, not a right) to exercise judgment and, sometimes, restraint. In today’s milieu of sensationalism and pressure to “break news”, there are few professional journalists who have a record to warrant unrestricted access and even fewer who possess the intellect and patriotism to be able to assess such a story and refuse to release such strategically damaging “reporting”. This was a story which might have made superb material for a book in a few years, but Mr. Hastings, like most of his present ilk, obviously believes that timely means now!
One other thought – General Shinseki was retired for standing on principle during the Iraq war, and is now the Secretary for Veteran Affairs. Perhaps, for a General who has achieved the pinnacle of his profession, there is more personal satisfaction in maintaining personal standards than in toeing any political line – and a distinct possibility that a future Administration will regard that maintenance of personal standards as more important than the storm in a teacup now brewing over the failure of the Commander-in-Chief to impress one of his most important and hand-picked subordinates?
Update – President Obama has accepted General McChrystal’s resignation and nominated General Petraeus in his stead. Good luck General Petraeus. May you have better support from your Commander-in-Chief (and the Pentagon) than you had during the debates on the surge in Iraq!
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Tim Wilson is a retired British Army officer who now works as an independent consultant. He worked for 2 years for USAID in Iraq post-retirement and spends much time traveling.
Tim Wilson is a retired British Army officer who served in a variety of command appointments on numerous operational tours during a 30 year military career. He now works as an independent consultant and over the last 2 years worked for USAID in Iraq.
Archives Pre-May 8, 2008: Please click here
blog comments powered by Disqus