Saturday, June 26, 2010

Military official disputes Rolling Stone article



By Barbara Starr, CNN Pentagon Correspondent
June 26, 2010 10:59 a.m. EDT
Gen. Stanley McChrystal resigned as commander in Afghanistan after the publication of a Rolling Stone article.

Washington (CNN) -- In the Rolling Stone article that got him fired, Gen. Stanley McChrystal says of the aides who surround him "I'd die for them. And they'd die for me." But the military men around McChrystal are now silent.

Not one of those anonymously quoted has come forward, according to a source close to the general. No one has acknowledged they told Rolling Stone McChrystal thought President Barack Obama looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" in his first meeting with military brass or that the general was personally "disappointed" after a meeting with the commander-in-chief.

It's no surprise he never claimed he was misquoted, several military sources who personally know McChrystal told CNN. They say, despite his fatal mistake in judgment, it is in his character to take sole responsibility for the inappropriate statements and command atmosphere.

The general has remained silent except for a statement of apology and a brief statement announcing his resignation.

But days after his ouster, one military official who worked for McChrystal in Afghanistan has told CNN that many of the controversial quotes in the article were never meant to be used on-the-record. But at no point did the official dispute the accuracy of comments about the president or other key administration officials that appeared in the article.

"Many of the sessions were off-the-record and intended to give him (writer Michael Hastings) a sense of how we operated as a team," wrote the International Security Assistance Force official who communicated with CNN on the condition no name was used.

"Hastings conducted several one-on-one interviews -- some of those were on background and others were on the record. I have found no evidence to suggest that any of the salacious political quotes were from any of these one-on-one interviews. They all appear to have been in settings that were off the record."

Since the beginning, Rolling Stone magazine has insisted it abided by the understanding between the publication and military about what Hastings could use in his reporting.

"Everything we published was on the record," Rolling Stone Executive Editor Eric Bates said to CNN on Tuesday. "We were very clear about the boundaries, for attribution or off the record."

Bates maintained that position when told of the objections by the military official.

"In every instance we abided by the ground rules," Bates told CNN Friday in a telephone interview.

The military official said that the magazine confirmed facts in the article but suggested they did not check any of the controversial elements.

"They asked us to check the facts of series of issues. In total, they don't come close to revealing what ended up in the final article," the official said.

Bates said there was no need to check the quotes because Hastings had either tape recordings or extensive notes on material such as specific quotes.

A spokesman for the magazine e-mailed CNN later Friday to reiterate the point.

"We never fact check quotes given to us from our interview subjects, as is common practice," wrote Mark Neschis, a spokesman for Rolling Stone's publisher, in an e-mail to CNN. "Our reporters obviously either recorded the comment, or wrote it down, so it's not necessary."

Rolling Stone also says it never sent the whole article to the military for fact checking but rather sent a number of questions to Duncan Boothby, the press aide who resigned in the wake of the controversy, to make sure of the accuracy of the story.

The military official provided a copy of the exchange between Rolling Stone's fact checker and Boothby in which the fact checker poses about 30 questions. The official provided the e-mail to demonstrate McChrystal and his staff did not know the article was going to cause such a firestorm and to show that perhaps, in the military's view some, ground rules were violated.

For example, the fact checker asks if McChrystal voted for Obama, saying that information came directly from the general.

Boothby replies in all capitals, " IMPORTANT -- PLEASE DO NOT INCLUDE THIS -- THIS IS PERSONAL AND PRIVATE INFORMATION AND UNRELATED TO HIS JOB. IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE TO SHARE. MY REASON FOR THIS IS IT WOULD PRESENT AN UNDUE COMMAND INFLUENCE ON JUNIOR OFFICERS OR SOLDIERS WHO SHOULD MAKE THEIR OWN POLITICAL DECISIONS. THERE ARE VERY STRICT RULES IN THE MILITARY ON SEPARATING CHURCH AND STATE ON THIS SORT OF STUFF -- HAVE TO KEEP OUT OF POLITICAL PREFERENCE AND PERSONAL CHOICE."

In the Rolling Stone article, Hastings reported that the general "had voted for Obama." Despite Boothby's insistence that the information should not be included in the article, it does not appear he was contesting that it was said on the record.

Allowing statements to be declared off-the-record after the fact is not accepted journalistic practice.

Most of the questions focused on confirming specific details about McChrystal, such as the number of times the general traveled around the country with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Other questions tried to confirm information that could only be learned from McChrystal's spokesman, such as some of the private jokes between the general and his staff that were in the article.

"Does Gen. McChrystal carry a custom-made set of nunchuks in his convoy that are engraved with his name and four stars?" the Rolling Stone fact checker asks.

"HE DOESN'T CARRY THEM. HIS PROTECTION DETAIL MADE THEM FOR HIM AS A JOKE AS WELL AS A SPECIAL HOLDER IN THE CONSUL OF HIS VEHICLE," Boothby answered, again in all capital letters. "IT CAME FROM ONE DAY M4 [a military shorthand for McChrystal's rank] WAS TESTING HIS PERSONAL STAFF TO MAKE SURE THEY HAD EVERYTHING BEFORE WE LEFT FOR A MEETING. 'MY GLASSES?' 'CHECK SIR' 'MY BRIEFING BOOK?' 'CHECK SIR' 'NUNCHUCKS' (HE WAS JOKING TO SHOW HIS STAFF THAT THEY HADN'T THOUGHT OF EVERYTHING, SO THEY WENT OUT AND HAD A SET MADE FOR HIM."

It's a drag to be a Taliban commander.


In Afghanistan, a Taliban commander disguised as a woman was shot dead Friday night in Afghanistan when he fired at troops, NATO's International Security Assistance Force said.
Authorities identified the man as Ghulam Sakhi, the senior Taliban commander in northern Logar province.

ISAF said intelligence sources tracked Sakhi to a compound near the village of Qal-eh Saber in Pul-e 'Alam district.

After Afghan troops called for women and children to leave a building, Sakhi came out with the group, disguised in women's attire.

ISAF said he pulled out a pistol and a grenade and fired at troops. Afghan and coalition forces shot him and he dropped the grenade, which detonated and wounded a woman and two children.

Authorities say Sakhi was involved in improvised explosive device attacks, ambushes and indirect fire attacks. He also kidnapped and killed a National Directorate of Security chief in Logar province.
In other Afghan fighting, several insurgents in Zabul province were killed in a "precision airstrike" on Friday night and bomb attacks in southern Afghanistan killed three NATO-led service member on Saturday.

Friday, June 25, 2010

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.

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin