Gen McChrystal and the President

[Brett327]

I've been kind of mulling this thought over for the past week or so and I think it would make for an interesting conversation here. However the information got into the public domain, it's clear that Gen McChrystal's desire to augment the number of forces in Afghanistan (most say ~40K more troops) is out there and being debated in the media. This "leak" was gently rebuked by the President's National Security Advisor Jim Jones, as he indicated that these kinds of matters should come up through the chain of command.

So here's the question: All political leanings aside (I know that's a difficult proposition for some of you), is it appropriate for a General in the field to conduct independent public/political/media campaign to sway policy in a direction that he believes will promote mission accomplishment, or is he out of line for doing this through anything other than the official channels of his chain of command. Can/should a General divorce himself from the civilian policy-makers, or is that the tail wagging the dog?

Brett

 

[nittany03]

Didn't Harry Truman answer this question 50-plus years ago? Admiral Fallon resigned for something very similar; I'm surprised this hasn't blown up more than it has.

 

[desertoasis]

There's a reason that the Secretaries of Defense and all the subordinate service Secretaries are civilians, to make sure that the military is not implementing policy and receiving troop augmentations and money unchecked and as 'a law unto themselves' to use the Templar phrase. While I think he's right to request a troop increase, he should have kept it within the proper channels, that particular road ending with the CinC of the US Armed Forces...

He has a chain of command, and it should not become blurry the nearer to the top you are. In fact, it should be quite the opposite. The people at the top should know exactly where such requests go and see to it that only those people are appraised of the situation, not appealing to the public to sway the opinion of their elected officials. The odds are good that what the public wants and what will be most effective in a tactical sense don't match up in the slightest.

The media should find out about this stuff after the fact. In my opinion, every news story about troop augmentation or movements should be in past tense. 'Troops numbers HAVE been augmented' that kind of thing.

 

[SkywardET]

Ostensibly, a flag officer should not be setting policy at the level of the civilian leadership above him/her. We are not a junta, we are a corporatist democratic republic.

 

[Uncle Fester]

I'm of the opinion that this has been inflated far out of proportion by those in the media with axes to grind. From my understanding, the row is mostly over a statement GEN McChrystal made during Q-and-A at a symposium, to the effect that he didn't believe a counter-terrorism (as opposed to a COIN) strategy would work in Afghanistan, and that if we were going to pursue a COIN strategy, we'd need more troops. Then GEN Jones and the SECDEF sort of mildly spatted his hand.

The Left ran with it because they think this shows insubordination by the military toward their new, left-leaning C-in-C. Most of my in-laws are liberal Dems and they all seem to think that the Pentagon is filled with reincarnations of Curt LeMay and that the President is going to have to bring the generals sharply to heel before they'll obey him.

The Right's running with this because they think it shows the President's indecisiveness/inexperience/disrespect for the military, or just seems to confirm whatever opinion they had of the Administration before. Or that the President just wants to get out of Afghanistan immediately, damn the cost and hang the failure on the Army.

 

[HH-60H]

From my understanding, the row is mostly over a statement GEN McChrystal made during Q-and-A at a symposium, to the effect that he didn't believe a counter-terrorism (as opposed to a COIN) strategy would work in Afghanistan, and that if we were going to pursue a COIN strategy, we'd need more troops.

I haven't read or watched it yet, but here is the speech in London, both the transcipt and video of the speech and Q&A.

http://www.iiss.org/recent-key-addresses/general-stanley-mcchrystal-address/

 

[Mumbles]

From the Oct 1 edition of the NYT:

In an oblique acknowledgment of the tricky political terrain, General McChrystal said there had been no pressure on him from military superiors to scale down his troop request — a pattern that developed at points during the Iraq war, when American generals hesitated to call for more troops after the defense secretary, Donald H. Rumsfeld, ruled them out.

“All of the interaction I’ve had with my senior leadership, they’ve not only encouraged me” to be blunt in stating his case, the general said, “they’ve insisted on it.”

As if in an afterthought, he added, laughing, that there was no certainty he would always be so free to speak so plainly. “They may change their minds and crush me some day,” he said.

It's just a matter of time before he resigns on his own volition or is asked to do so IMO....We'll see.

 

[Clux4]

It's just a matter of time before he resigns on his own volition or is asked to do so IMO....We'll see.

Kinda of what I was thinking. His strategy may not necessarily dovetail that of the NSC. So it will be interesting to see how that works out.

 

[exhelodrvr]

McChrystal's statements have actually been in support of the general direction the President consistently seemed to be heading (based on a number of statements from March through mid-August.) To this point nothing inappropriate has taken place. If McChrystal disagrees with the decision of the President, once that has been made, it would be inappropriate to do so in a public setting.

 

[Spekkio]

So here's the question: All political leanings aside (I know that's a difficult proposition for some of you), is it appropriate for a General in the field to conduct independent public/political/media campaign to sway policy in a direction that he believes will promote mission accomplishment, or is he out of line for doing this through anything other than the official channels of his chain of command. Can/should a General divorce himself from the civilian policy-makers, or is that the tail wagging the dog?

I don't think that Gen. McChrystal is "conducting an independent media campaign to sway policy." In this age of information, it would be nearly impossible for a General to ask for more troops/money/whatever without it getting leaked to the media. I'm quite sure that anyone who is professional enough to get to where Gen. McChrystal is would make his intentions clear to his CoC, and all reports indicate that he has. Is it a crime to be honest about it? I don't think so.

You also have to factor that in this current political climate, conducting a "media campaign" for more troops would be self-destructive. The majority of TV media outlets and the Democratic Congress do not want more troops sent to Afghanistan.

But to directly answer your question: IF a General or Admiral were to make independent speeches to news agencies prior to discussing the matter with the CoC, that would most definitely be inappropriate.

 

[chefmike]

What if....

General M was told to "inadvertantly" float this one out there as a "trial balloon"
That way BHO would not look like a "war monger" to his primary ultra left constituency (the hollywood types who write huge checks)
Then BHO could then say that he was upping troop levels at the request of the generals in theater....

Could be why there has been no fall out from SECDEF
other than the hand slap.

Truman wanted to fire MacArthur. Almost did....:icon_rage

 

[Brett327]

General M was told to "inadvertantly" float this one out there as a "trial balloon"
That way BHO would not look like a "war monger" to his primary ultra left constituency (the hollywood types who write huge checks)
Then BHO could then say that he was upping troop levels at the request of the generals in theater....

Could be why there has been no fall out from SECDEF
other than the hand slap.

Truman wanted to fire MacArthur. Almost did....:icon_rage

Says who? What's the source of that information?

Brett

 

[fc2spyguy]

Says who? What's the source of that information?

Brett

I think he was using his title as the beginning, so the sentence would read 'what if Gen . . .

 

[Brett327]

I think he was using his title as the beginning, so the sentence would read 'what if Gen . . .

I understand. It just sounds like AM talk-radio speak to me.

Brett

 

[insanebikerboy]

I understand. It just sounds like AM talk-radio speak to me.

Brett

And of course, rumors like that "what if" statement are the best, there's absolutely no way to prove it's wrong!