It seems harsh to suggest the Pentagon top brass don't know what they're doing. But those who care to read the transcript of the press conference at which the sacking of the top American general in Afghanistan was announced may find that conclusion hard to resist. "In some ways we're learning as we go here," said Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs. It was not a reassuring admission.
The public defenestration of General David McKiernan, a distinguished career officer who took command in Kabul less than one year ago, was brutal in that cold, callous way peculiar to American officialdom. More to the point, it remains largely unexplained. "We can and must do better ... We have a new policy set by our president, a new strategy, a new mission ... I believe new military leadership is also needed," said Robert Gates, the defence secretary.
The changes in command underscore the impression that Obama, abandoning long-term nation-building goals, is looking for quick, minimalist results in Afghanistan, chiefly containing and deflating the insurgency. His aides don't want the war dragging on when he stands for re-election in 2012. And the top brass increasingly believe the real counter-terrorism battle is centred next door, in the tribal areas of Pakistan.
As military expert Max Hastings noted this week, Pakistan matters more. Afghanistan was becoming a sideshow; it was the "wrong" war. Now McKiernan has been fired for the wrong reasons.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/may/12/david-mckiernan-afghanistanSo wwhat is the objective?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
