Global Perspectives on the "Af/Pak" War
Thursday February 9th 2012

More on Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal

McChrystal was in command during the troop incursions into the FATA that created a lot of trouble and contributed little value in the public’s eye.

…it is worth noting the dates of McChrystal’s appointment and President Obama’s decision not to release more photos of prisoner abuse in Iraq: May 11 and 13, respectively. — Esquire

An earlier post on the sacking of Commander US/NATO Forces in Afghanistan, Gen. McKiernan, had noted the nomination of Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal as his replacement. Ever since, McChrystal’s shady past has been raised in the media in a number of different contexts. In a recent post, Who is Stanley McChrystal, Joshua Foust provides some more background (reproduced below; emphasis added):

The other week, during the shock/surprise appointment of Gen. Stanley McChrystal to Afghanistan, I noted his unexplained involvement in two major scandals:

Nama Abuse

Nama Abuse

One unit under his command, the now-notorious Task Force 6-26, which was assigned to find HVTs, or High Value Targets in Iraq, is credited with the ultimate death of Zarqawi. The problem is, along the way they faced accusations of running a secret camp that tortured prisoners, and they were implicated in at least two detainee deaths during torture sessions. Their camp, called Camp Nama, became something of a lightning rod after a “computer malfunction” destroyed upwards of 70% of their records and an investigation into their conduct stalled out.

Pat Tillman

Pat Tillman

More relevant to Afghanistan is GEN McChrystal’s involvement in the shameful coverup of Pat Tillman’s friendly-fire death. While he was named among the list of high-ranking military personnel believed to have covered up the circumstances of Tillman’s death, GEN McChrystal was “spared because he had apparently drafted a memo urging other officials to stop spreading the lie that Tillman died fighting the Taliban. He drafted that memo, however, after signing the award for Tillman’s posthumously-awarded Silver Star, the commendation for which claims, in part, that he was leading the charge against a Taliban assault. GEN McChrystal has never clarified why he signed an award for Tillman dying under enemy fire right before begging his colleagues and superiors to stop lying about Tillman dying under enemy fire.

Both of these matter, as they remain dark marks marring an otherwise glowing reputation from insiders. It highlights one major problem with the boys at JSOC [Joint Special Operations Command]: they have terrible PR management. Unfortunately, as the constant (and mostly false) accusations of civilian casualties reach a fever pitch in Afghanistan, you must have an agile media capability—and from what we see here, McChrystal has something of a tin ear. (I am ignoring his proficiency at hunting and killing baddies, which, near as I can tell, is unquestioned even by detractors.)

That’s partly what makes this profile in Esquire so interesting. It not only makes many of the same points (we know almost nothing about McChrystal, and what we know is VERY mixed), but adds several more of great interest. Most interesting to me is that McChrystal was in command during the troop incursions into the FATA that created a lot of trouble and contributed little value in the public’s eye.

Bus Esquire also has a far less balanced, much more endorse-y portrait of McChrystal by the reporter who uncovered the allegations of abuse at Camp Nama and noted McChrystal was at their heart.

Today it seems obvious that it’s wiser to follow the rules and avoid slippage, especially given the shameful partisanship that has led so many Republicans to defend waterboarding. Without a clear moral line, these folks would bring back the Inquisition just to avoid saying they were wrong.

But I’m not eager to judge soldiers on the battlefield who pushed the line to save their lives. I’m certainly not going to call them torturers for violating the Geneva Convention with a 14-hour interrogation. And, like Garlasco, I would be very cautious judging someone like McChrystal, a soldier my president has chosen to put his confidence in, a man who could end up saving tens of thousands of lives.

Which makes for an interesting counterpoint to the potential controversy. I still am not opposed to his appointment per se, but McChrystal does need to break out of his hyper-secretive JSOC mode if he’s going to run the war effectively. McKiernan had taken some halting, and much appreciated steps toward at least a reasonable amount of transparency. It is a process that runs counter to the entire JSOC mission. If McChrystal can operate as an open, available, and trust-building commander—something he seems to have done with his troops, if not with the public at large—then he could easily be a great commander. It just requires answering a few questions and putting some niggling fears to rest.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.