NYT : New Jobs Set for 2 Generals With Iraq Role

New Jobs Set for 2 Generals With Iraq Role

By THOM SHANKER | April 24, 2008

WASHINGTON — Under a plan announced at the Pentagon on Wednesday, the two commanders most closely associated with President Bush’s current strategy in Iraq would be elevated into new posts with responsibilities extending into the next administration over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Gen. David H. Petraeus would take charge of all military affairs across the Middle East and Central Asia, and would be succeeded as the senior commander in Iraq by Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, who returned to Washington in February after serving 15 months as General Petraeus’s deputy.

Asked whether the planned nominations by Mr. Bush were a sign that American policy was to “stay the course” in Iraq, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said that the security gains that had been achieved under General Petraeus’s command meant that “staying that course is not a bad idea.”

The nomination of General Petraeus could, however, portend a renewed American focus on Afghanistan, where the American war effort is widely recognized to be lagging, with violence by the Taliban and Al Qaeda on the rise. Mr. Gates already has expressed the desire to send several thousand additional troops to Afghanistan next year, although that could require further reductions in troop commitments to Iraq. General Petraeus would be expected to apply his views of counterinsurgency to Afghanistan, which may include a push toward increased troops.

Mr. Gates said he and President Bush settled on General Petraeus for the post because his counterinsurgency experience in Iraq made him best suited to oversee American operations across a region where the United States is engaged in “asymmetric” warfare, a euphemism for battling militants and nonuniformed combatants.

The previous Central Command chief, Adm. William J. Fallon, chose early retirement in March after rankling the Bush administration with public comments that seemed to suggest differences with the White House. If General Petraeus and General Odierno were to win Senate confirmation to their new posts, Mr. Gates said, they would take over in late summer or early fall.

The situation in Iraq remains fragile, as General Petraeus acknowledged in testimony to Congress this month when he warned that recent security gains could be easily reversed. Under his command, an increase in American forces brought troop levels as high as 165,000, and even critics of the increase say it contributed to a decline in violence, along with the cease-fire proclaimed by the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr for his Mahdi Army militia and a shift in sentiment among Sunni tribes that turned them against Sunni militants.

Among the three candidates still vying to become the next president, Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, has defended the idea of maintaining high troop levels even after the troop increase runs its course in July, bringing the number down to slightly more than 140,000.

The two Democratic contenders, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, by contrast, have pressed for troop reductions at a pace far faster than those that General Petraeus has endorsed and have pledged to carry out withdrawals even if it meant going against the advice of field commanders. It would be unusual for a new president to replace a senior general new to his assignment. In a statement, Mrs. Clinton described General Petraeus as “an able and respected leader in Iraq under incredibly difficult circumstances,” and said she looked forward to hearing. “how he will meet these important challenges” of the broader Central Command region.

Mr. McCain, at a news conference on Wednesday, said that General Odierno “is maybe not perfect, but I think he has done a magnificent job.” Referring to General Petraeus, Mr. McCain said, “I think he is by far the best-qualified individual to take that job” as the regional commander.

After three tours in Iraq, General Petraeus, 55, has become perhaps the best-known military officer of his generation, and it had been expected that his next assignment after Iraq would be as the top American commander in Europe. Chosen instead to take charge of a region that includes Pakistan and Iran, as well as Iraq and Afghanistan, General Petraeus issued a statement on Wednesday saying, “I am honored to be nominated for this position and to have an opportunity to continue to serve.”

General Petraeus and General Odierno have built a strong working relationship and are believed to see eye to eye on how to carry out the complicated Iraq mission — one they believe requires offensive military operations, more subtle counterinsurgency missions and society-wide reconstruction, all at once.

Mr. Gates said General Odierno was the logical choice to succeed his old boss because he was familiar to the officers and troops in Iraq and, not least, to the Iraqis. “In most parts of the world, especially the Middle East, personal relationships make a big difference,” Mr. Gates said.

The defense secretary also announced that Lt. Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, Mr. Gates’s senior military assistant, would be nominated for Army vice chief of staff, a post that General Odierno had been expected to take. General Chiarelli has had two tours in Iraq — first as commander of the First Cavalry Division and coalition forces in Baghdad, and then as the No. 2 commander in the country.

The Central Command position would be General Petraeus’s fourth tour in the region since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. He first served as commander of the 101st Airborne Division, which invaded Iraq from the south and set up an area of control across the north. However, parts of the north, in particular the city of Mosul, are today among the most unstable in the nation.

He returned to Iraq to serve as commander of training Iraqi security forces, then commanded Fort Leavenworth, where he oversaw the writing of the Army’s new counterinsurgency manual, certain to influence his efforts in Afghanistan, too, if he is confirmed to the Central Command job.

General Petraeus’s challenge as leader of Central Command will be to avoid being trapped in continued, detailed management of the Iraq mission as he takes on vast geographical responsibilities across North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia, which clearly are the focus of American policy today far and above Europe or East Asia.

Mr. Gates said he believed that General Petraeus would win quick confirmation, based on recent conversations that he had with leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee. But he said “a good handoff” of responsibilities.

That transfer could come about the time that General Petraeus has promised to begin a new review of troop levels in Iraq, after the departure of five brigades by July will leave a force of about 140,000, slightly more than were in Iraq before the troop increase began.

The announcement that General Petraeus, 55, would head Central Command, and Mr. Gates’s emphasis on operations in Afghanistan as well as Iraq, reinforced the impression that Pentagon leaders expected the United States to have significant numbers of troops deployed in those two countries for some time to come.

When he was asked whether General Petraeus’s promotion to the theaterwide post, coupled with the selection of his former deputy, General Odierno, to lead forces in Iraq, should be interpreted as a warning to Iran, which has often been accused of meddling with the affairs of its neighbor Iraq, Mr. Gates did not answer directly.

But he did not discourage the suggestion of a warning to Iran, saying: “What Iranians are doing is killing American servicemen inside Iraq.”

General Odierno had been criticized in some quarters during his first tour in Iraq, as commander of the Fourth Infantry Division based in Tikrit. A high point was the capture of Saddam Hussein by forces under his command, but his troops also were criticized for heavy-handed operations that, critics said, helped fuel frustration and, perhaps, the insurgency itself.

Yet he received high marks during his most recent tour, as day-to-day commander of operations playing an important role in prosecuting that troop increase strategy.

Michael R. Gordon contributed reporting from Baghdad, and David Stout from Washington.

WaPo : Top U.S. Officer in Mideast Resigns

Top U.S. Officer in Mideast Resigns

By Thomas E. Ricks | Washington Post Staff Writer | March 12, 2008

The top U.S. commander in the Middle East, whose views on strategy in the region have put him at odds with the Bush administration, abruptly announced his resignation yesterday, calling reports of such disagreements an untenable "distraction."

Adm. William J. "Fox" Fallon became head of U.S. Central Command last March, putting him ostensibly in charge of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But he clashed frequently with Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, over strategy and troop levels, Pentagon officials said. Though technically Fallon's subordinate, Petraeus has more experience in Iraq and has forged a strong connection with President Bush.

Fallon had made several comments reflecting disagreement with the administration's stance on Iran, most recently in an Esquire magazine article last week that portrayed him as the only person who might stop Bush from going to war with the Islamic republic.

"Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time," Fallon said in a statement. Though he denied that any discrepancies exist, he said "it would be best to step aside and allow" Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates "and our military leaders to move beyond this distraction."

Fallon is expected to step down at the end of the month, after barely a year in his position, and just eight days before Petraeus is scheduled to testify before Congress about conditions in Iraq. Military officers said it appeared that it was made clear to Fallon that nobody would object if he stepped down.

"Admiral Fallon reached this difficult decision entirely on his own," Gates said yesterday in an unscheduled news conference. He added: "I believe it was the right thing to do, even though I do not believe there are, in fact, significant differences between his views and administration policy."

The defense secretary also praised Fallon's abilities as a strategist, even though it was the admiral's strategic views that seemed to trouble the administration. "He is enormously talented and very experienced, and he does have a strategic vision that is rare," Gates said.

The Esquire article, written by Thomas P. M. Barnett, a former Naval War College professor, asserted that if Fallon left his job anytime soon, it could signal that Bush intends to go to war with Iran. Asked about that yesterday, Gates called it "just ridiculous."

Several Democrats were quick to accuse the administration of not tolerating dissent. "It's distressing that Admiral Fallon feels he had to step down," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.). "President Bush's oft-repeated claim that he follows the advice of his commanders on the ground rings hollow if our commanders don't feel free to disagree with the president." Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) asked whether Fallon's resignation is a reflection that the administration is hostile to "the frank, open airing of experts' views."

A likely successor to Fallon is Petraeus, some defense experts said. The general could be promoted to the Centcom post and replaced in Baghdad by Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, who until last month was Petraeus's deputy in Iraq. Odierno, who has been nominated to become Army vice chief of staff, developed a strong working relationship with Petraeus.

Another possible successor mentioned yesterday is Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the head of Special Operations in Iraq. McChrystal recently was nominated to be director of the staff of the Joint Chiefs, a key Pentagon position.

On Iraq, Fallon butted heads with Petraeus over the past year, arguing for a more rapid drawdown of U.S. troops and a swifter transition to Iraqi security forces. Fallon even carried out his own review of the conduct of the war -- a move that surprised many Pentagon officials, in part because Odierno and Petraeus had already revamped U.S. strategy in Iraq and, with Bush's approval, had implemented a buildup of about 30,000 additional troops, moving them off big bases and deploying them among the Iraqi population.

In the Esquire article, Fallon contends that Iraq was consuming excessive U.S. attention. In a part of the world with "five or six pots boiling over," he is quoted as saying, "our nation can't afford to be mesmerized by one problem."

The article was "definitely the straw that broke the camel's back," a retired general said, especially because of its "extraordinarily flip, damning and insulting" tone. He noted that since it appeared last week, it has been the talk of military circles, where it was expected that Fallon would be disciplined.

Fallon, one of the last Vietnam veterans in the U.S. military, was the first Navy officer selected to lead Centcom, a role traditionally granted to Army and Marine generals such as H. Norman Schwarzkopf, Tommy R. Franks and Anthony C. Zinni. One reason he was chosen to replace Army Gen. John P. Abizaid was because the administration -- dealing with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as a diplomatic crisis over Iran's nuclear program -- wanted a seasoned officer who could step into the job quickly, without having to learn the ropes of top command, according to a person involved in his selection.

As a veteran of Pacific Command, where he focused on dealing with the rise of China, Fallon was seen as someone who would be comfortable operating at the highest levels of diplomacy and politics. He had told colleagues that he viewed Iran as a problem similar to China -- one that mainly required steady engagement rather than aggressive confrontation. That stance put him at odds with Iran hawks both inside and outside the administration.

Peter D. Feaver, a former staff member of Bush's National Security Council, said that the public nature of Fallon's remarks made it necessary for the admiral to step down. "There is ample room for military leaders to debate administration policy behind closed doors," said Feaver, a political scientist at Duke University. "However, taking such arguments into the media would violate basic democratic norms of civil-military relations."

But Richard Danzig, who served as Navy secretary from 1998 to 2001 and has known Fallon for 15 years, said Fallon's departure will leave a significant hole in a critical region. "Any turnover in Centcom has real costs, because this is an arena in the world, more than others, that depends a lot on relationships and extensive periods of conversation and mutual understanding," he said.

That might prove especially true in Pakistan. Fallon had become a point man for crucial military relations there as the Pentagon implements a stepped-up program to help Pakistani forces deal with Islamic extremism along the border with Afghanistan. In visits to Islamabad in November and January, he cemented ties with Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani, the new armed forces chief of staff. The administration hopes that Kiyani will keep the military out of Pakistani politics while showing new aggression toward al-Qaeda and Taliban forces along the Afghan border.

Fallon's departure also reflects Gates's management style. During his 15 months at the Pentagon, the defense secretary has shown a willingness to move decisively in cases of internal conflict. A career intelligence officer, he demanded the resignation of Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey last year because of the way he handled the fallout from reports about substandard care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Gates also declined to nominate Gen. Peter Pace, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for a second two-year term, amid concerns that a Democratic-controlled Congress would grill Pace on Iraq.

Yesterday, Gates said the perception that Fallon disagreed with the administration's policies was enough to concern Fallon that he may no longer be effective in the region. Gates quoted Fallon as saying that the situation was "embarrassing."

Staff writers Josh White, Karen DeYoung and Peter Baker contributed to this report.

NYT : Top U.S. Commander in Mideast to Retire Early

Top U.S. Commander in Mideast to Retire Early

By THOM SHANKER and DAVID STOUT | March 11, 2008

WASHINGTON — Adm. William J. Fallon, the top American commander in the Middle East whose views on Iran and other issues have seemed to put him at odds with the Bush administration, is retiring early, the Pentagon said Tuesday afternoon.

The retirement of Admiral Fallon, 63, who only a year ago became the first Navy man to be named the commander of the United States Central Command, was announced by his civilian boss, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who said that he accepted the admiral’s request to retire “with reluctance and regret.”

President Bush said Admiral Fallon had served his country with “honor, determination and commitment” and deserved “considerable credit” for the progress in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But despite the warm words from Mr. Bush and Mr. Gates, there was no question that the admiral’s premature departure stemmed from a public appearance of policy differences with the administration, and with Gen. David H. Petraeus, the American commander in Iraq.

Mr. Gates acknowledged as much when he said that Admiral Fallon, in asking permission on Tuesday morning to retire, had expressed concerns that the controversy over his views were becoming “a distraction.” But the secretary labeled as “ridiculous” any speculation that the admiral’s retirement portends a more bellicose American approach toward Iran.

Admiral Fallon had rankled senior officials of the Bush administration with outspoken comments on such issues as dealing with Iran and on setting the pace of troop reductions from Iraq — even though his comments were well within the range of views expressed by Mr. Gates.

Officials said the last straw, however, came in an article in Esquire magazine by Thomas P. M. Barnett, a respected military analyst, that profiled Admiral Fallon under the headline, “The Man Between War and Peace.” The article highlighted comments Admiral Fallon made to the Arab television station Al Jazeera last fall, in which he said that a “constant drumbeat of conflict” from Washington that was directed at Iran and Iraq was “not helpful and not useful. I expect that there will be no war, and that is what we ought to be working for. We ought to try to do our utmost to create different conditions.”

Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, was asked at a news briefing on Monday to comment on the controversy. Mr. Morrell said Mr. Gates and the admiral maintained a good working relationship, but that, like all military commanders, Admiral Fallon served at the pleasure of the president.

Mr. Gates said on Tuesday that Army Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey would take Admiral Fallon’s place until a permanent replacement is nominated and confirmed by the Senate.

The Esquire article quotes Admiral Fallon as urging a “combination of strength and willingness to engage.”

Readers of the Esquire article who are among the admiral’s boosters said they did not believe on reading that piece that Admiral Fallon himself had made comments that could be viewed as insubordinate to the president.

But the cast of the lengthy piece put the admiral at odds with the White House.

“If, in the dying light of the Bush administration, we go to war with Iran, it’ll all come down to one man,” the article begins. “If we do not go to war with Iran, it’ll come down to the same man.”

Both Mr. Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, have maintained an unwavering public line that disagreements with Iran should be resolved diplomatically, and that any military option remained only the last resort.

“I think that the secretary has made clear and I think Admiral Fallon has made clear that the first priority of this administration is to deal with our problems with Iran in a diplomatic fashion,” Mr. Morrell said Monday. “That is our first hope. That is our first effort. However, we have all made clear, time and time again, that nothing, no avenue is off the table.”

Democrats pounced on the retirement announcement, with Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, calling it “yet another example that independence and the frank, open airing of experts’ views are not welcomes [sic] in this administration.”

Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said he was sorry to see the admiral go. “Admiral Fallon is well known for his excellent diplomatic skills in representing the United States overseas,” Mr. Levin said. “I can only hope that the decision to retire was his own.” And Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, who often differs with the administration on foreign-policy issues, said that “the credibility which Admiral Fallon brought to the issues he was involved in will be sorely missed.”

When Admiral Fallon was nominated in January of 2007 to be commander of American military forces across a region where they are engaged in two ground wars, it struck many analysts as odd. When he was confirmed for the post, he replaced Gen. John Abizaid as the top officer of Central Command.

At the time, a range of senior Pentagon civilians and military officers said Mr. Gates had recommended that Admiral Fallon move from his post as commander of American forces in the Pacific to bring a new strategic view — as well as maritime experience — to the Middle East.

The admiral began service through a commission from the Navy’s Reserve Officer Training Program, as opposed to the more prestigious Naval Academy. He later graduated from the Naval War College and the National War College, and earned a master’s degree in international studies from Old Dominion University.

Although known for being tough on his subordinates, Admiral Fallon also developed a reputation for nuanced diplomatic negotiations with friendly nations — and some with whom the United States has more prickly ties. Earlier in his career, when he was the American military commander in the Pacific, he annoyed conservatives by taking what they considered an overly conciliatory stance toward China.

Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican candidate for president, praised the admiral. “As a fellow Naval aviator, I know the sacrifices he made during his long and distinguished career,” the senator said. “Under Admiral Fallon’s leadership at Central Command, the situation in Iraq has improved dramatically. All Americans should be grateful for Admiral Fallon’s service, and respect his decision to retire. I am confident President Bush will act promptly to select the right person to lead Central Command at this critical juncture.”