General McChrystal: His Own Exit Strategy?

By Brigitte L. Nacos

If General Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, does not resign before visiting the White House tomorrow, President Obama must fire him right then and there—or even before that. A commanding general who criticizes the president and his top military and civilian national security aides publicly in the midst of a war, can no longer be trusted to carry out the president’s war strategy that, ironically, was mostly designed by McChrystal himself. That’s precisely what McChrystal and his closest aides did as reported in Rolling Stone magazine. 

After they expressed contempt for literally everyone directly involved in national security matters as these relate to the conflict in Afghanistan in the presence of a Rolling Stone reporter, they did not try to retract or soften their remarks during the fact checking process.  Perhaps this indicates that McChrystal and Company have lost their sense of reality in the confines of their military in-circle or, more likely, that the general went rogue because his counterinsurgency strategy and tactics have not worked well at all since he took charge last year.

In an alarming part of the Rolling Stone revelations, McChrystal attacks the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, a retired three-star general and fellow West Pointer, by remarking, "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so.' "

So, the general who wrote the script for succeeding in Afghanistan at last, ponders who will be blamed and who not “if we fail.” Does this point to McChrystal’s doubts about the outcome of the war? One wonders how the insurgents, most of all the Taliban, and the Afghan population react to this sort of talk—not to mention the impact of the revelation that deep divisions exist within America’s top military and civilian leadership.

Knowing full well the content of the article (headline “Runaway General”), McChrystal must have known its explosive impact. Which leads to my guess that going rogue was his exit strategy and a pass to blame others for the problems he leaves behind.

Whatever his motives, just as insubordination cost General Douglas MacArthur his job in 1951, when he was fired by President Truman, it must send McChrystal into retirement.

When the certified war hero MacArthur returned from the Far East, he received an enthusiastic homecoming with parades and other celebrations. However a retired McChrystal will be received in some quarters, he isn’t and will not be a MacArthur.

Comments

[Brydon Eady]

Hello Professor Nacos,

What do you think the odds are of McCrystal staying on? Karzi praised him this week as the 'best' general to control the war in Afghanistan. Would you say this bolsters his credability, or does the praise from the Afghani President make him less credible?

Thanks for another good article,

-Brydon

[Brigitte Nacos]

I can't see how McChrystal can remain in his position regardless of his relationship with Hamid Karzai.Obviously, the two men meet regularly and have a good relationship. But that has not at all improved the situation on the ground as a result of McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy.
The only question is who can step into the commander position immediately. Obviously, the guys around McChrystal are part of the same inner circle that was so reckless in talking to the Rolling Stone reporter. More stunning is that this was not a one-shot interview but ongoing conversations with a guy who was and traveled with them for a while.

[Grindle]

McCrystal should have been fired for the cover up of the Tillman death. He should have been fired when he lobbied in a British interview to get another 30,000 troops.
Lets hope Obama believes In Three Strikes and You Are Out.

[Brigitte Nacos]

Grindle, I agree with you 100%. Generals should tell presidents and other civilian leaders in private what they think--not in public in efforts to prevail with their own policy agenda. He did that last fall and got away with it. I agree, too, that he should have paid some price for the Tillman cover-up.