A key advantage of democracy over dictatorship, it is often argued, is that accurate information flows much more effectively upwards to the top under the former than the latter system. Dictators do not like to here unwelcome truths, and their toadies make sure that they do not do so. In consequence, their populations suffer from repeated famines as agricultural policies repeatedly fail; and their leaders embark on unwinnable wars and battles because no one will advise them to hold or to redirect their fire.
Unfortunately, when democracies elect weak and less than smart leaders, they also become vulnerable to the same phenomenon, as is currently the case of the Obama adminstration in the United States. For such leaders know their own personal limitations, and fear that stronger and smarter counsellors will displace them from decision-making authority. So, they too choose to listen to the true believers and to the sycophants, in order to make-believe that they themselves are smarter ythan they are. Barack Obama appears to have fallen prey to such temptation, with serious consequences for the U.S. war against the Taliban, both in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
General Stan McChrystal, either by accident or by design, has exposed the soft-under-belly of the Obama adminstration’s war policy. In so doing, he has rendered a great service to his nation, even at the cost of breaching military code, and thus exposing himself to dismissal by his Commander-in-Chief. For if an Emperor has no clothes, and a brave soul tells him that he is uniquely exposed, that Emperor confirms his own stupidity should he choose to remain naked while killing the messenger who advised him that all is much less than well in the big picture of things.
What then is the essence of the truth that has been forced upon the President. First, that the Vice-President that he selected is a truly stupid man, prone to intellectual incoherence that ill-fits his office. When such a senior official chooses continually to criticize a war strategy - counterinsurgency or COIN – that has been approved by the President and that is in process throughout the war zone, he deserves to be disciplined, not the general whose forces risk their lives on the field of battle.
Second, when the President attends an initial meeting with his chosen general without briefing himself for the occasion, and offering only a few short minutes of his time, it is right that he should be publicly rebuked for his inefficiency and laziness. The golf course and the basketball hoops should not lead a President astray from the work for which he is paid so well.
Third, when a President covers for his own limitations by appointing unqualified individuals such as Jim Jones to the key position of National Security Advisor, Karl Eikenberry to the key position of U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, and Clinton re-tread, Richard Holbrooke as U.S. Special Envoy, he deserves tro have his fingers publicly rapped by his lead general in the field.
One thing is surely clear in all the upheaval that has followed from the Rolling Stones article that outlines General McChrystal’s reactions to such policy errors by the Obama administration. The appointment of McChrystal to lead the war in Afghanistan is the one first-rate decision that the President has made in that field. No doubt the President now feels that he has made a mistake; for, by appointing competence rather than incompetence, he has opened himself up to the very criticism that he most feared. Now, however, he has a genuine chance to redeem himself.
If President Obama is capable of rising above his personal limitations, he will congratulate General McChrystal for telling the truth, while asking him in future to report those truths exclusively to the Oval Office. He will then muzzle his Vice-President, replace his National Security Advisor and his Special Envoy, and recall his Afghanistan Ambassador, as he confirms unequivocal support for COIN under the high quality leadership of General Stan McChrystal. If McChrystal proves to be successful in that war, then the President might consider awarding him that much-coveted fifth star. And that would be the mark of a true President of a great nation.
Tags: hire for competence not sycophancy, importance of policy coherence during a major war, McChrystal balls, moving sound information to a president
June 23, 2010 at 3:58 pm |
Government fears above all ridicule. It attacks the core of legitimacy.
When those inside government begin to ridicule itself, it is a sign that the core of legitimacy is evaporating.
June 24, 2010 at 2:53 am |
Did the core of legitimacy for this particular regime ever exist? According to various Democrats or rather ex-Democrats (Indies and PUMAS) the primaries were stolen from Hillary Rodham Clinton. They have been busy producing the evidence for their claims – if you think that the Black Panthers controlling a polling booth is unusual, then you do not know how these tactics were applied in the primaries, so that Hillary did not get the delegates. It was all very underhand.
There remains the question of the citizenship of Obummer. One does not have to be a dyed in the wool birther to question his citizenship. Keeping in mind that the book “Dreams of my father” reads like a work of fiction written by a ghost writer (more than likely William Ayers), one only has to look at what the background offers – a father who was a Kenyan and a British citizen and a mother too young to pass on citizenship in her own right. However, there is another reason to question the citizenship and that is the issue of the Indonesian step-father plus going to school in Indonesia. He needed to have Indonesian citizenship to go to school there…. hmmm…… What is clear is that people are lying about the meaning of Natural Born Citizen in order to cover up the fact that the man was never eligible to be placed on the ballot. To be a Natural Born Citizen, not just a citizen of the USA, or even a Native born citizen, one must be born to parents who are both USA citizens and on USA soil. For this reason, there is a real issue with eligibility.
On top of the citizenship issue (and there are some who are also claiming that Obummer was born in Kenya in July and that granny Dunham registered his birth using a mail in form) there is the issue of illegal campaign funds. For all the nonsense about foreign corporations funding USA elections, the reality is that in that last election funding was given to Obummer from sources outside of the US… these funds were brought into the country via diplomatic bags and probably via Venezuela (connection to William Ayers). What is in fact known is that there were donors in the camps in the Gaza strip who made small donations via credit card and that these were laundered through the PAC system…. ah the web of lies that has led to this who deceit.
This particular POTUS fears all forms of criticism. It is a real sign of weakness. There are other signs of weakness as well, and to cap it all off there is the deceit over the oil spill and the clean up or rather the lack of attempt to clean up.
Follow the money and what is to be found? Petrobas the Brazillian company. George Soros is a large investor in Petrobas. Obummer gave a very large sum of US funds to Petrobas for the purposes of drilling offshore. The new well license in offshore Brazil is about twice the depth of the Horizon well…. yet Obummer has placed a moratorium on all drilling in the Gulf and has extended that moratorium to Alaska. Who stands to benefit? The rig owners will not remain idle, and they will ship them out. Petrobas has already attempted to get hold of the rigs that are now being used in LA. This means that whilst the residents of LA and other Gulf States are being royally screwed the one winner will be George Soros.
There is another winner. There is a fund. I think the name is Ventura or something like that… that fund dumped a very large packet of BP shares prior to the rig explosion. Obummer stands to gain a lot of money from that transaction……
June 24, 2010 at 3:32 pm |
Aussie,
core of legitimacy for this particular regime ever exist
Yes, because the People call him “Mr. President”.
Legitimacy was conferred by vote, including those that voted for McCain. The vote says “we agree that who ever wins will be President, even if our guy loses”.
June 24, 2010 at 11:38 pm
That does not make this particular man a legitimate president. He has acted with subterfuge. He was not eligible to be on the ballot.. the idiots who voted for him should not even be amongst the voting population… most of them were dumbed down low intelligence types who believed in unicorns and that ones this poseur took over as President they would not have to pay their mortgage… that it would be paid for them….
June 24, 2010 at 2:57 am |
BTW Military officers are not allowed to make any critical comments of a commander-in-chief.
Imagine if Charlie was in charge in the UK and had interfered in Afghanistan telling his soldiers that they were not allowed to engage the enemy just in case the person was a “civilian” – or that Charlie had appointed a real jerk as ambassador to Afghanistan (like Eikenberry). The military officers would not be allowed to comment about the gross incompetence of such orders. This is what McChrystal was facing.
It is unfortunate but in all military services if an officer makes such a statement it is considered to be insubordination and it means either a court-martial or being asked to resign. Even a very slight remark will be enough to earn being disciplined.
June 24, 2010 at 3:34 pm |
Aussie,
The consequences of a situation of a subordinate who cannot dispute his superior, you will have oil platforms blowing up, and armies slaughtered in the field.
June 24, 2010 at 11:32 pm
the military is very different from civilian life.
The issue on the oil rig is that the BP executive told the engineers that they had to do it his way, even though it was dangerous.
In the military, even a junior officer is not allowed to say even the slightest criticism of the CIC… that is just how it is…
June 24, 2010 at 11:58 am |
The fundamental flaw in your logic is that no organization so heavily dependent on command and control and adherence to the chain of command can tolerate a ‘tone at the top’ that is rooted in insubordination and openly/publicly criticizing the CIC. No one forced McChrystal to do the interview with RS – there were likely ample other avenues to convey a message if he deemed it so critically important to do so. For a General so adamant in the principles of COIN, his own behavior undermines the very tenets of said strategy.
June 24, 2010 at 3:35 pm |
Ray,
It is not a “flaw” to the logic. The logic says if there is no outlet for dispute, the consequences will be ridicule and morale loss, and probably the loss of the army in the field.
June 24, 2010 at 11:34 pm |
Ray, I think that you have something. McChrystal should not have done the interview with Rolling Stone. However, the actual interview did not contain anything. The damage was done at a dinner when they were all inebriated. The journalist in question had continued to latch on to the group and reported on a private conversation…. the General did not in fact make any of the remarks to the journalist in question. He ran with this story and destroyed a career.
June 24, 2010 at 6:48 pm |
This is an excellent discussion with good points on both sides. I still claim that wise political leaders will not dismiss great generals for that kind of insubordination. Rome would have lost Marius, Sulla and Julius Caesar if SPQR had behaved like Obama. And the goths would have been at the gates of Rome much sooner than was the case. COIN is McChrystal’s vision and as a special ops man he was best suited to lead it. Petreaus has now become accustomed to the soft life on the US circuit, recovering from his cancer operation in good hospitals and good hotels. I doubt that he is much suited to frontier warfare in Afghanistan, or will be out there in the trenches with his men. Of course, Obama will be able to stroke his own ego away from criticisms about his inadequacy as a wartime president. I doubt that his NSA Jim Jones will call him out for his errors. Nor will Biden.
June 24, 2010 at 11:36 pm |
Charles it is not just inadequacy as a war time president. He has in fact made the world a far more dangerous place since he has been POTUS.
August 27, 2010 at 5:32 pm |
This is great! I can’t wait to see more.