McChrystal Submits Resignation
Should the President Accept It?
GEN Stanley McChrystal has apparently submitted his resignation to President Obama, following a very damaging series of interviews he and his staff did for a reporter for Rolling Stone Magazine. It’s only the latest in a series of missteps and gaffes committed by a very dedicated and talented field commander, but one who has a knack for demonstrating extraordinarily bad judgment in the public arena.
One has to wonder, first, what the hell McChrystal was thinking in granting so much access to a reporter from Rolling Stone? One has to assume that he would realize that the correspondent, Michael Hastings, had little interest in reporting the nuances of successes the General’s counter-insurgency campaign had racked up. More to the point, his primary purpose would be to elicit juicy comments and critiques of the civilian leadership in order to make the story a sexy sale at the news stands. In that Hastings succeeded and the General and his staff fell feet first into the trap.
In the story, which will be available Friday but is attached here (“The Runaway General”) McChrystal says little, criticizing only Obama in one instance and AMB Holbrooke in another. But his staff went far beyond, calling the National Security Advisor (4-star Marine General) Jim Jones a “clown”, the Vice President as a know-nothing irritant (you mean “Bite Me”, not “Biden”, said one staffer), accused the President of being totally unprepared for a session with McChrystal, hammered AMB Holbrooke, and denigrated the President’s team unmercifully (many of whom are 3-4 star Generals and Admirals).
We should understand that the General’s interviews, and that of his staff, come in the midst of a sense that the mission in Afghanistan is failing. There seems to be no credible central government in Kabul, the Afghan national police and Army have fallen far short of expectations, corruption and mismanagement are rampant, and the Taliban seems to be making significant operational gains. In this general downturn no doubt some will be looking how to shift the blame for ultimate failure.
It might be hard for McChrystal to argue that he did not get the resources he asked for to implement his war strategy. Certainly the President gave him 95% of it. Or that the strategy is directed by Washington—the COIN tactics being pursued in the field are certainly those advocated by the military establishment. The General would have a good case that the commitment to begin withdrawing troops in July of 2011 gave the wrong signal to the enemy as well as to the Kabul government, but everyone in the chain of command is on record saying that they agreed with that commitment.
The quotes illustrate also how dysfunctional the civil-military relationship in Afghanistan has become, with (retired 3-star General) Ambassador Karl Eikenberry at odds with McChrystal and ISAF. Quite a contrast with the excellent working relationship AMB Ryan Crocker and GEN Dave Petraeus had in Iraq!
My colleague, Steve Metcalf, has noted that “The death of a warrior….is always a sad event, particularly when he has served so honorably for so many years”. But, Metcalf argues, the General’s continuing challenge of the political leadership (remember his outspoken comments in London at the IISS last year, or his very public differences with AMB Eikenberry), “has reached a level that can no longer be countenanced”. I agree.
The frustration that the General and, especially his staff, is feeling is mainly an outgrowth of the sense that public opinion in America has given up on the wisdom of the commitment in Afghanistan, and that this weariness is manifesting itself at the highest levels of the White House. Increasingly there is a sense that the war is unwinnable, that we are being “held captive” by a corrupt and intransigent Karzai, and that the military strategy Obama agreed to support is not tenable.
GEN McChrystal (or his staff) complained that he was “betrayed” by AMB Eikenberry, that Obama handed him “an unsellable position”, that the NSC was unsupportive (GEN Jones and LTG Doug Lute ??), mocked VP Biden’s alternative in Afghanistan (“Counter-terrorism”), dissed a meeting with the President as a “10-minue photo-op”, and described AMB Dick Holbrooke as “dangerous—because he is a wounded animal”.
The President faces a difficult decision tomorrow, but despite GEN McChrystal’s extraordinary experience, record and dedication, the President should accept his resignation and move on. That will be painful for all concerned, and both the Commander in Chief and his field commander are badly wounded from this encounter.
But the General wasn’t elected, as was the President. Maybe he will be in the future! Doubt it—the “stab in the back” rhetoric won’t find much ground here and the American public will be hard pressed to believe that if only the nuanced differences in the General’s strategy were adopted, we would have secured a certain victory in Afghanistan.
Stay tuned! Would love to be a fly on the wall in that Oval office session tomorrow.
— Ty