Boss’s Firing May Result in Departures From Kabul

By ALISSA J. RUBIN
Published: June 24, 2010


KABUL, Afghanistan — The business of running the war in Afghanistan went on seemingly as usual on Thursday, although many in the NATO command headquarters here were reeling over the rapid-fire events that culminated in their boss’s dismissal, forcing many of them to polish their résumés.

While no one said he was leaving, there was little doubt in anyone’s mind that most of those closest to Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who was fired on Wednesday by President Obama, would leave with him. That would be partly in a show of solidarity and partly because the new commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, would not request their services.

The senior people around General McChrystal, much like the top advisers to the president, serve at the general’s request. When a new commander is appointed, he almost always assembles his own team. That is somewhat more complicated in this case, because precipitous changes in the middle of a war could mean a loss of continuity and institutional knowledge.

“A lot of people will stay for the transition and then you’ll see them gradually pack up,” said a senior NATO officer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not permitted to speak publicly on the subject. The goal is to ensure that broad policy and day-to-day operations are not interrupted.

Several NATO officials said they expected that aides to General McChrystal who were quoted in Rolling Stone magazine making disparaging remarks about senior Obama administration officials would leave, possibly sooner rather than later.

Many people are watching closely to see whether some senior figures remain, including Maj. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, who leads the intelligence operation, and Maj. Gen. William C. Mayville, the deputy chief of staff in charge of operations. Both are viewed as important to the mission and both have relationships with General Petraeus, although they were also close to General McChrystal, said two NATO officers who work with them. They are also respected figures, viewed as bringing a nuanced understanding of counterinsurgency tactics.

But even those officers may leave. In particular the officer in charge of operations, a critical job, must have the complete trust of the commanding general. General Mayville’s relationship with General McChrystal might make it impossible for him to make the switch to General Petraeus.

Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, the chief of communications, was among a very small group of aides who accompanied General McChrystal to Washington this week. He was scheduled to return to Afghanistan over the weekend, which suggested that he would stay on, at least for now.

As a general relieved of his command, General McChrystal will not return to Afghanistan, according to his staff.

General Petraeus is known for bringing a large and diverse team to work with him, one with civilians and military personnel. They tend to be fiercely loyal to him. In Iraq, where he served for much of the war, he had several advisory groups to ensure that he was looking at all potential solutions to different problems.

General Petraeus must be confirmed by the Senate before he can assume command.

The military said Thursday that six NATO service members died on Wednesday. Four British soldiers were killed in a vehicular accident and two Romanian soldiers were killed by a homemade bomb while on patrol.

In all, 80 NATO troops have been killed in Afghanistan in June, making it the deadliest month for the United States-led coalition since the war began in 2001, according to the Web site iCasualties.org.

McCrystal's story dismays Pentagon brass

NYT:
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, who had sponsored Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal as commander in Afghanistan, expressed profound disappointment in his judgment on Thursday — tempered with thanks for his years in combat — after he was fired from the post. The dismissal followed publication of a profile of the four-star general in Rolling Stone that quoted him and his aides disparaging other officials.

“Honestly, when I first read it, I was nearly sick,” said Admiral Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Mr. Gates said he wholly supported the decision by President Obama to remove General McChrystal, who had helped devise the administration’s risky and expensive strategy of counterinsurgency in Afghanistan and was in charge of carrying it out.

Mr. Gates said that the statements attributed in the article to General McChrystal and his inner circle of aides “are unacceptable under our form of government and are inconsistent with the high standards expected of military leaders.”

During a Pentagon news conference, Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen made their first lengthy comments on the controversy and the command change. They were both clearly saddened by the sidelining of one of the military’s most combat-tested Special Operations officers.

Mr. Gates conceded that in his advice to Mr. Obama about the matter, he had expressed concern that a change of command would sap the war effort of momentum at a pivotal moment, when by all accounts it is already proceeding more slowly than expected.

It was Mr. Obama’s suggestion to give the job to Gen. David H. Petraeus, the former commander in Iraq who now leads American forces across the Middle East; Mr. Gates said that the choice of General Petraeus eased his mind.

“My primary concern over the past few days has been to minimize the impact of these developments on the conduct of the war in Afghanistan,” Mr. Gates said. “The president’s decisions fully and satisfactorily address that concern.” He described the decision to give the Afghan command to General Petraeus as “the best possible outcome to an awful situation.”

Well aware that a perception of disarray in the American and NATO military headquarters in Kabul might worry American troops and allies while emboldening the insurgency, Mr. Gates spoke directly to all of those audiences.

“No one — be they adversaries or friends, or especially our troops — should misinterpret these personnel changes as a slackening of this government’s commitment to the mission in Afghanistan,” Mr. Gates said. “We remain committed to that mission and to the comprehensive civil-military strategy ordered by the president to achieve our goals there.”

For his part, Admiral Mullen spoke of the pre-eminence of civilian control of the military.

“We do not have the right, nor should we ever assume the prerogative, to cast doubt upon the ability or mock the motives of our civilian leaders, elected or appointed,” Admiral Mullen said. “We are and must remain a neutral instrument of the state, accountable to and respectful of those leaders, no matter which party holds sway or which person holds a given office.”

The Rolling Stone article contained a number of quotations attributed to General McChrystal and his aides that were rude and dismissive of members of Mr. Obama’s national security team.

In the hours after the article surfaced in public, Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen discussed it with General McChrystal. “In my meeting with him, he didn’t try to explain it,” Mr. Gates said on Thursday. “He just acknowledged that he had made a terrible decision.”

Mr. Gates, who has questioned what he calls the negative narrative of the war in news reports and Washington political discussions, said the mission in Afghanistan was “hard but not impossible.”

“I do not believe we are bogged down,” he said. “I believe we are making some progress. It is slower and harder than we anticipated.”

MAYBE THEY SHOULD READ THIS

There's gold in them thar caves!

Afghanistan could be self-sufficient within a decade if its mineral resources are properly exploited, its mines minister has said.

Wahid Shahrani is in London to encourage the world's mining companies to invest in his country.

He says his country has untapped mineral wealth worth in excess of $3tn.

Mr Shahrani says that mining could move the country from being aid dependent to being self-sufficient in 10 years.

Vast reserves
The BBC's Jill McGivering says that Mr Shahrani is on a multi-billion dollar sales tour, trying to drum up bids from the world's mining companies for his country's untapped minerals.

ESTIMATED DEPOSITS

Iron: $421bn
Copper: $274bn
Niobium: $81bn
Cobalt: $51bn
Gold: $25bn
These include vast reserves of oil, gas, copper, gold and lithium.

Mr Shahrani sees mining as the country's economic mainstay in the future.

In seven years mining taxes should pay the government $1bn a year, he says, and within a decade Afghanistan could be self-sufficient.

In an interview with the BBC, Mr Shahrani dismissed critics who argue that such a massive influx of money raises concerns about corruption.

"We have improved our legislation, the procedures have been upgraded and we have been getting a tremendous amount of support from our international partners," Mr Shahrani said.


"In future whatever contracts would be awarded, all the information will be published, to make sure that all the relevant stakeholders, civil society and media and parliament, will have access to the information, to make sure we will have sufficient amount of the safeguards, to make sure that we will achieve the high standards of transparency."

Security is another key concern in relation to exploiting the country's mineral reserves, correspondents say.

The first big projects on offer are in the most secure regions of the country - and the government has promised investors a special mining protection security force.

Mining companies will also have to invest heavily in infrastructure - from electricity to roads and railways, Mr Shahrani said.

McCrystal out - Petraeus in ...

Washington (CNN) -- A day after his disparaging comments about America's civilian leadership surfaced and dramatically struck a nerve in the White House, the top commander in Afghanistan has been relieved of his post.

President Barack Obama accepted the resignation of Gen. Stanley McChrystal "with considerable regret" and nominated Gen. David Petraeus, the head of the U.S. Central Command. The moves come in the wake of the revelation that Rolling Stone magazine would publish politically explosive remarks made by the general and his aides about key administration officials.
"It is the right thing for our mission in Afghanistan, for our military and for our country," Obama said outside the White House, flanked by top civilian and military leaders, including Vice President Joe Biden; Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Defense Secretary Robert Gates; and Petraeus.

Obama said McChrystal's remarks in Rolling Stone undermined the civilian control of the military "at the core of our democratic system." He said the decision wasn't based on disagreement in strategy or personal issues.

"I believe that it is the right decision for our national security. The conduct represented in the recently published article does not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general."
Obama said that as hard as it is to lose the general, the "war is bigger than any one man or woman" and that while he welcomes debate among his team, he won't tolerate division.

"It was a difficult decision to come to the conclusion that I've made today," Obama said. "Indeed, it saddens me to lose the service of a soldier who I've come to respect and admire. But the reasons that led me to this decision are the same principles that have supported the strength of our military and our nation since the founding."

Obama said it is his duty "to ensure that no diversion complicates the vital mission that they are carrying out" and that he has a "responsibility to do whatever is necessary to succeed in Afghanistan and in our broader effort to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda."

I believe that this mission demands unity of effort across our alliance and across my national security team. And I don't think that we can sustain that unity of effort and achieve our objectives in Afghanistan without making this change."

Obama urged the Senate to swiftly confirm Petraeus, who would leave his Central Command position. Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Carl Levin, D-Michigan, indicated to CNN that confirmation hearings could begin as early as next week.

McChrystal issued a statement Wednesday saying that he strongly supports "the president's strategy in Afghanistan and am deeply committed to our coalition forces, our partner nations, and the Afghan people. It was out of respect for this commitment -- and a desire to see the mission succeed -- that I tendered my resignation. It has been my privilege and honor to lead our nation's finest."

A source close to McChrystal offered a description of the roughly 30-minute meeting between Obama and McChrystal that led to the general's resignation Wednesday morning. McChrystal briefly explained the magazine article at the center of the controversy, took responsibility and then offered his resignation, the source said. Obama accepted the resignation, the source said.
The president "had no intention of keeping him," the source said.

The Rolling Stone story set off a political firestorm. Obama was "angry" after reading the general's remarks, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Tuesday.
McChrystal was recalled to Washington and met with Gates and Mullen before going to the White House, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said. McChrystal's personal belongings will be shipped home from Afghanistan, the source close to the general said.

McChrystal was not invited to participate in a separate Wednesday White House national security meeting on the war in Afghanistan, two sources told CNN.
The "magnitude and graveness" of McChrystal's mistake in conducting the interview for the article were "profound," Gibbs said. Gates said McChrystal had "made a significant mistake and exercised poor judgment."

McChrystal apologized Tuesday for the Rolling Stone profile. Two defense officials said the general fired a press aide over the article, which appears in Friday's edition of the magazine.

"I extend my sincerest apology for this profile. It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened," McChrystal said in a Pentagon statement. "Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard."

In the Rolling Stone story, Michael Hastings writes that McChrystal and his staff had imagined ways of dismissing Biden with a one-liner as they prepared for a question-and-answer session in Paris, France, in April. The general had grown tired of questions from Biden since earlier dismissing a counterterrorism strategy the vice president had offered.

"'Are you asking about Vice President Biden?' McChrystal says with a laugh. 'Who's that?'"
"Biden?' suggests a top adviser. 'Did you say: Bite Me?'"

McChrystal does not directly criticize Obama in the article, but Hastings writes that the general and Obama "failed to connect" from the outset. Sources familiar with the meeting said McChrystal thought Obama looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the room full of top military officials, according to the article.

Later, McChrystal's first one-on-one meeting with Obama "was a 10-minute photo op," Hastings writes, quoting an adviser to McChrystal. "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's the guy who's going to run his f---ing war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The Boss (McChrystal) was disappointed."

The article goes on to paint McChrystal as a man who "has managed to piss off almost everyone with a stake in the conflict," including U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, special representative to Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke and national security adviser Jim Jones. Obama is not named as one of McChrystal's "team of rivals."

Of Eikenberry, who railed against McChrystal's strategy in Afghanistan in a cable leaked to The New York Times in January, the general is quoted as saying, "'Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, "I told you so.'"
Hastings writes in the profile that McChrystal has a "special skepticism" for Holbrooke, the official in charge of reintegrating Taliban members into Afghan society and the administration's point man for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"At one point on his trip to Paris, McChrystal checks his BlackBerry, according to the article. 'Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke,' he groans. 'I don't even want to open it.' He clicks on the message and reads the salutation out loud, then stuffs the BlackBerry back in his pocket, not bothering to conceal his annoyance.

"'Make sure you don't get any of that on your leg,' an aide jokes, referring to the e-mail."
McChrystal said in his apology Tuesday that he has "enormous respect and admiration for President Obama and his national security team, and for the civilian leaders and troops fighting this war and

I remain committed to ensuring its successful outcome."
The remarks from McChrystal and his staff in the Rolling Stone story were strongly criticized on Capitol Hill. Three key Senate leaders on defense and foreign policy issues -- Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut -- said in a news conference Wednesday that they believe Obama had no choice but to replace McChrystal.

They called Petraeus the best possible man to take over command, but also said Obama should now make clear that a troop withdrawal from Afghanistan will only occur when conditions allow it, rather than on the July 2011 date set by the administration.

A number of Republicans used the occasion to slam Obama for publicly declaring a withdrawal date.
Petraeus "is an outstanding military leader, but even he can't win in Afghanistan if the president continues to insist on an arbitrary withdrawal date -- a fact our enemies are counting on and our allies fear," said Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri, the top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Most Democrats, on the other hand, lined up solidly behind the president.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, said in a written statement that Obama's "decision to return Gen. (David) Petraeus to the battlefield provides not just continuity in philosophy, but tested diplomatic skill that is at the very center of a military strategy which hinges on progress in governance to sustain military gains."
House Armed Services Committee chairman Ike Skelton, D-Missouri, said that Petraeus "is the best that we have."

"I have great confidence in his ability to bring about a successful outcome in Afghanistan. The commander-in-chief must have confidence in his commanders in the field," he said. "It is time to move on and return our focus to waging the war in Afghanistan."

A spokesman for the Afghanistan Defense Ministry said his government would have preferred to see McChrystal stay, but was happy Petraeus had been tapped as the replacement.
"We're not happy to see Gen. McChrystal go, but of all the choices that could have been made, we are happy to hear it is Petraeus who will continue the mission," Gen. Mohammad Zahir Azimi said.
Obama tapped McChrystal to head the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan in the spring of 2009 shortly after dismissing Gen. David McKiernan.

READ THE ROLLING STONE ARTICLE HERE

General Stanley McChrystal likely to get fired for telling it like it is

General Stanley McChrystal may be living out his final hours as the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan following disparaging comments he made regarding several top Washington officials.

"The last thing that President Obama needs is for somehow the impression to get out there that he can be kicked around and disrespected by one of his generals," CBS Chief Washington Correspondent Bob Schieffer said today on Washington Unplugged. "I think General McChrystal has a real problem, and it's going to be very hard for him to survive."

This isn't the first time the general has been chastised by the president. Last year, McChrystal made negative comments regarding Vice President Joe Biden and received a tongue lashing, which won't make it any easier for him to get through round two, Schieffer said.

"You can't do this and get away with it, especially not more than once," he said. "[If] you're looking at Washington politics you have to say 'so who's going to be there to defend him now?' You kind of need a champion when you get into one of these kind of messes in Washington. He's got to find somebody who's going to be on his side, and right now I don't see anybody."

Allies may be tough to come by for McChrystal, who spoke negatively of the president, vice president, national security advisor and special envoy to Afghanistan in a Rolling Stone article. According to Schieffer, the last time a general spoke negatively of civilian leadership in public was when General Douglas MacArthur spoke out against former President Harry Truman's "limited war strategy" in North Korea. MacArthur's remarks were meant to influence strategy whereas McChrystal's remarks appear to have no purpose.

"This is like frat boys all going out and getting drunk and talking about the faculty advisor or something," Schieffer said.

Foreign Policy Managing Editor Blake Hounshell agreed there seemed to be no reason behind the comments. "When you read the article it's hard to discern what's the strategy here," he said. "Here's this guy who's supposed to be a master of counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan, right? And he doesn't even seem to have mastered Washington politics."

The comments seem to have no basis, and according to Schieffer, even if they did, there was no reason to go public with them. "Usually when military leaders have criticism they're much more adroit," Schieffer said. "They go and talk to maybe the ranking member of the other party on the Armed Services Committee and let him make the criticisms. The military is very good at getting their position out in ways that do not come back to them."

McChrystal has always been one to say what others won't, but these comments may be his final act as U.S. Forces commander in Afghanistan. Names such as General Jim Mattis, the commander of U.S. Joint Forces Command, have already been thrown out in talks of replacing him. Although there is no official word on whether or not the general will keep his job, his outlook doesn't look good.

"The president is angry," said The New York Times' Jeff Zeleney. "He's furious about this because he thinks it sort of feeds into the narrative that he is not interested or does not understand the conflict in Afghanistan. It's not good if you're General Stanley McChrystal. We don't know yet at this point if he'll ask for his resignation, we'll find out.