Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
- The Rise of the New Economy Movement
- Preying on Poverty: How Government and Corporations Use the Poor as Piggy Banks
- The Organic Watergate: Alarming Report Reveals USDA's Cozy Relationship with Corporate Agribusinesses in 'Organics'
- 'Biggest Act of Civil Disobedience in Canadian History'
- Updated: Under Pressure, TED Releases 'Income Inequality' Talk
Popular content
Today's Top News
Generals Seek to Reverse Obama Withdrawal Decision
WASHINGTON - CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus, supported by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, tried to convince President Barack Obama that he had to back down from his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq within 18 months at an Oval Office meeting Jan. 21.
US soldiers stand guard at an intersection in Baghdad, 2008. Iraq said it is prepared for an early drawdown of US troops after President Barack Obama asked the American military to draft plans for a withdrawal from Iraq. (AFP/File/Ali Yussef) But Obama informed Gates, Petraeus and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen that he wasn't convinced and that he wanted Gates and the military leaders to come back quickly with a detailed 16-month plan, according to two sources who have talked with participants in the meeting.
Obama's decision to override Petraeus's recommendation has not ended the conflict between the president and senior military officers over troop withdrawal, however. There are indications that Petraeus and his allies in the military and the Pentagon, including Gen. Ray Odierno, now the top commander in Iraq, have already begun to try to pressure Obama to change his withdrawal policy.
A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilizing public opinion against Obama's decision.
Petraeus was visibly unhappy when he left the Oval Office, according to one of the sources. A White House staffer present at the meeting was quoted by the source as saying, "Petraeus made the mistake of thinking he was still dealing with George Bush instead of with Barack Obama."
Petraeus, Gates and Odierno had hoped to sell Obama on a plan that they formulated in the final months of the Bush administration that aimed at getting around a key provision of the U.S.-Iraqi withdrawal agreement signed envisioned re-categorizing large numbers of combat troops as support troops. That subterfuge was by the United States last November while ostensibly allowing Obama to deliver on his campaign promise.
Gates and Mullen had discussed the relabeling scheme with Obama as part of the Petraeus-Odierno plan for withdrawal they had presented to him in mid-December, according to a Dec. 18 New York Times story.
Obama decided against making any public reference to his order to the military to draft a detailed 16-month combat troop withdrawal policy, apparently so that he can announce his decision only after consulting with his field commanders and the Pentagon.
The first clear indication of the intention of Petraeus, Odierno and their allies to try to get Obama to amend his decision came on Jan. 29 when the New York Times published an interview with Odierno, ostensibly based on the premise that Obama had indicated that he was "open to alternatives".
The Times reported that Odierno had "developed a plan that would move slower than Mr. Obama's campaign timetable" and had suggested in an interview "it might take the rest of the year to determine exactly when United States forces could be drawn down significantly".
The opening argument by the Petraeus-Odierno faction against Obama's withdrawal policy was revealed the evening of the Jan. 21 meeting when retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, one of the authors of the Bush troop surge policy and a close political ally and mentor of Gen. Petraeus, appeared on the Lehrer News Hour to comment on Obama's pledge on Iraq combat troop withdrawal.
Keane, who had certainly been briefed by Petraeus on the outcome of the Oval Office meeting, argued that implementing such a withdrawal of combat troops would "increase the risk rather dramatically over the 16 months". He asserted that it would jeopardise the "stable political situation in Iraq" and called that risk "not acceptable".
The assertion that Obama's withdrawal policy threatens the gains allegedly won by the Bush surge and Petraeus's strategy in Iraq will apparently be the theme of the campaign that military opponents are now planning.
Keane, the Army Vice-Chief of Staff from 1999 to 2003, has ties to a network of active and retired four-star Army generals, and since Obama's Jan. 21 order on the 16-month withdrawal plan, some of the retired four-star generals in that network have begun discussing a campaign to blame Obama's troop withdrawal from Iraq for the ultimate collapse of the political "stability" that they expect to follow U.S. withdrawal, according to a military source familiar with the network's plans.
The source says the network, which includes senior active duty officers in the Pentagon, will begin making the argument to journalists covering the Pentagon that Obama's withdrawal policy risks an eventual collapse in Iraq. That would raise the political cost to Obama of sticking to his withdrawal policy.
If Obama does not change the policy, according to the source, they hope to have planted the seeds of a future political narrative blaming his withdrawal policy for the "collapse" they expect in an Iraq without U.S. troops.
That line seems likely to appeal to reporters covering the Iraq troop withdrawal issue. Ever since Obama's inauguration, media coverage of the issue has treated Obama' s 16-month withdrawal proposal as a concession to anti-war sentiment which will have to be adjusted to the "realities" as defined by the advice to Obama from Gates, Petreaus and Odierno.
Ever since he began working on the troop surge, Keane has been the central figure manipulating policy in order to keep as many U.S. troops in Iraq as possible. It was Keane who got Vice President Dick Cheney to push for Petraeus as top commander in Iraq in late 2006 when the existing commander, Gen. George W. Casey, did not support the troop surge.
It was Keane who protected Petraeus's interests in ensuring the maximum number of troops in Iraq against the efforts by other military leaders to accelerate troop withdrawal in 2007 and 2008. As Bob Woodward reported in "The War Within", Keane persuaded President George W. Bush to override the concerns of the Joint Chiefs of Staff about the stress of prolonged U.S. occupation of Iraq on the U.S. Army and Marine Corps as well its impact on the worsening situation in Afghanistan.
Bush agreed in September 2007 to guarantee that Petraeus would have as many troops as he needed for as long as wanted, according to Woodward's account.
Keane had also prevailed on Gates in April 2008 to make Petraeus the new commander of CENTCOM. Keane argued that keeping Petraeus in the field was the best insurance against a Democratic administration reversing the Bush policy toward Iraq.
Keane had operated on the assumption that a Democratic president would probably not take the political risk of rejecting Petraeus's recommendation on the pace of troop withdrawal from Iraq. Woodward quotes Keane as telling Gates, "Let's assume we have a Democratic administration and they want to pull this thing out quickly, and now they have to deal with General Petraeus and General Odierno. There will be a price to be paid to override them."
Obama told Petraeus in Baghdad last July that, if elected, he would regard the overall health of the U.S. Army and Marine Corps and the situation in Afghanistan as more important than Petraeus's obvious interest in maximizing U.S. troop strength in Iraq, according to Time magazine's Joe Klein.
But judging from Petraeus's shock at Obama's Jan. 21 decision, he had not taken Obama's previous rejection of his arguments seriously. That miscalculation suggests that Petraeus had begun to accept Keane's assertion that a newly-elected Democratic president would not dare to override his policy recommendation on troops in Iraq.
Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in 2006.
- Posted in

35 Comments so far
Show Alli hope that people read this article and see that the most powerful office is actually doing what is intended. this is a reassuring statement about the people's rediscovered voice in our capital. by the way, i do not pay the military to run propaganda against their superiors, do you?
I am certainly glad that Obama is sticking to his promise to redeploy our combat forces from Iraq over 18 months. But I hope he also balances that with his campaign do so only based on the advice of our commanders on the ground. I don't want leave Iraq in chaos.
"But I hope he also balances that with his campaign do so only based on the advice of our commanders on the ground. "
There is nothing to balance his stupid campaign with. Either shut up and withdraw or prepare to be flanked in 2012 !
"I don't want leave Iraq in chaos."
But joehope wants it left in chaos with US military presence. Got it !
I'm advocating ending the war safely and responsibly. What are you suggesting? If a large Civil War broke out (like the one in Lebanon in the 80's) then no, I don't think we should just leave Iraq to be engulfed in a genocide.
As Juan Cole put it, "Personally, I think "US out now" as a simple mantra neglects to consider the full range of possible disasters that could ensue."
"I mean, we are always complaining, and rightly so, about the genocide in Darfur and the inattention to genocides in Rwanda and the Congo earlier. Can we really live with ourselves if we cast Iraqis into such a maelstrom deliberately?"
I suggest reading Juan Cole's entire entry on Informed Comment Monday, August 22, 2005, if you want to know what responsible withdrawal should look like.
http://www.juancole.com/2005/08/ten-things-congress-could-demand-from.html
No general likes or wants to pull out of any war. This is how they make their claim to fame.
The military-industrial complex doesn't like it either. War = $$$$$
Ain't that the truth! If you're a professional in the military, you want to go where they're shooting at you. That's how you make your bones. They don't want to see the occupation of Iraq come to an end. You don't get the Silver Star for falling off bar stools.
This is nonsense extraordinaire. Your cynical spoutings are refuted right here in this article. Petraeus replaced a general who was against the surge. There are many generals who where against the whole Iraq debacle right from the beginning. And I'm sure it would be no trouble at all to find generals who support Obama's withdrawal plan.
I'm not trying to excuse anyone, but let's be real, huh?
So why isn't Obama doing the right thing by replacing General BETRAYUS with a real General rather than keeping that Bush yesman ? I don't see how you call that "hope and change" buddy !
I know you hate the military and everyone in it.
But, specifically, what has Petraeus done wrong?
He's a lot better than Rumsfeld.
"I know you hate the military and everyone in it."
Fucking idiot ! You never served in the military so you wouldn't know jack shit about it ! You already know that I served in that bloody Vietnam war and lost some limbs unless you didn't read my posts ! Right now, the military is totally corrupted by lowered recruiting standards, poor training, lack of proper equipment, etc ... Go serve in the military and let Obama dump your fucking ass in Afghanistan and Pakistan and see how you like it, bloody idiot ! Better yet, go sit in Gaza for a year without any luxuries for a year or two and then see how you like it !! You remind me of "Joe The Plumber".
"But, specifically, what has Petraeus done wrong?"
The answers are in front of you but you'd much rather worship that Bush yesman so go get your head examined.
"He's a lot better than Rumsfeld."
Pfft !! LOL ! You're fucking deluded man !
Poor Generals, they won't have a war to play in anymore. I bet KBR and Bechtel are upset that the geenerals were not successful in persuading President Obama to change his mind.
We not only need to et out of Iraq, but we also need to get the heck out of Afghanistan - the graveyard of empires.
Kitty Lady
The war and occupation are just as illegal as ever, which makes criminals of all the generals and other military and some non-miltary personel. As proven beyond question during BushCo, the Top Brass are all political flacks and care not one whit about the genuine security needs of the United States sans its overseas Empire.
The Empire MUST DIE for the republic to live.
I knew that Robert Gates could not be trusted to be the next defense secretary. As for General BETRAYus, Obama's a double fool to keep him as well ! BETRAYUS and GATES are both TRAITORS to the country and most of all give the troops a bad name ! President Obama, please fire those assholes and replace them or watch your term expire in 2012 !!
I hope Obama doesn't fold on this one and let the Iraq mess continue or he'll end up worse than LBJ and Carter by 2012 and probably find himself primaried out.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
Obama could take a cue from Bush/Cheney and fire all their asses. Not following orders during wartime is a hanging offense.
We the People ordered Obama to get us out now and he is following our orders. The Generals must follow Obama's orders or else.
Take a cue from Steele too. Bipartisanship is not a big deal.
We have the upper hand. Don't lose it for us.
A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama's decision.
**will be interesting to see how they spin that.
The economy is shot--great time to be wasting trillions on the war industry.
I guess they can try to recruit the unemployed for it.
A win win situation.
I agree with ezeflyer. Obama is commander-in-chief and should fire any and all insubordinate generals. As for the public relations campaign, there are plenty of military brass, active and retired, who would resoundingly back Obama's position here, and he should avail himself of their help.
I would bet you Obama is tougher than he looks.
Who is Keane that he has all this power in the military? Does he really think Obama should follow everything Petraeus and Gates want to do?
Obama should have cleaned house of all the Bush cronies, including the above-mentioned.
We want the troops out, the Iraqis want the troops out, the rest of the world wants the troops out, so do it!
And what was the busy General P doing at the Super Bowl? Doesn't he have a report to deliver?
It's time for Obama to pull a Truman and tell these disgrunteld tin stars to fade away.
spinwing
Let's see; he could get three with one blow....
Pan
Kudo`s on the few remainning brains that are not Pavlovian. That said consider that "they" never went away. They will always seek their ways EVEN AGAINST the Democratic majority.
By the MEDIA CORPORATIONS constant bias toward the PUBLIC and beholden to [ election cycle ]congressional people who`s adjenda is not to represent the people who elected them but to do the work of ?? who bring the money that gets them in and on the media 24/7.
Eisenhower Said BEWARE BEWARE of the MILITARY ..INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, and these are the people who will not listen ,there is a SHADOW GOVERNMENT that by repeating some news over and over and avoiding other news will as GOVENOR NORQUIST said DROWN ?? in the bathtub.
ORWELL said in the BOOK 1984 " War is Peace" so saith the Israeli`s ...Dahh their is no other option...Dahh.. Beware of the General Staff with their own Allegiances and Goals .
Allegiance to the Commander and Chief and the People (OF THE UNITED STATES [not ANY Foreign Power] that is SUBJECT TO CONGRESSIONAL Laws AND the CONSTITUTION are thorns THAT KEEPS GETTING IN THEIR WAY.
Obama wants A wise WITHDRAWAL NOT A DEBACLE that will bring MORE PEACE not less,the Military has it`s function and as I served and many others can be an honorable one with great sacrifices. But only in remembering that it is not a institution unto itself will it also be supported and trusted .
Petraeus needs to Retire SOON if he is not a loyal Commander THE COMMANDER AND CHIEF, President of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [ president Obama ] .
The Bushites are out but still pulling strings with disgruntled allies .
Remember MANY good Commanders were deep sixed by Bush and Cheney etc. that would have done it all different and now we know BETTER ,many were right . Intead they were maaligned and painted disloyal .
Liberty and Justice for "All"
Watch the Movie 7 days in May kirk douglas Fredrick March Burt Lancaster, GOOD Commanders GO BAD ..CONTITUTION FIRST .
Obama needs to take a crash course in "The Carlyle Group" and find the investors,
and all the high Muck-a-mucks that are buying out the world and invested in
the Military Industrial Complex. Where does Gates, Rumsfeld, Cheny fit in this
complex?
Obama will have to check with is zionist handler and Mossad agent Rham Emannuel before he makes any decision on the Middle East. Can't piss off AIPAC or the zionists.
Weird news story.
In the whole text, there is very little mention of the Iraqis deciding on the US troops withdrawal. In the sixth paragraph is a tenuous reference to the November, 2008, Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), though it doesn't even mention SOFA!
It's not Obama's or Petraeus' decision on US troops in Iraq. It's the Iraqis' decision.
There was a timeframe included in the November SOFA, and there was the inclusion of an Iraqi referendum on SOFA at the end of July, 2009. The Iraqis will decide, and we can only hope that the vote is not rigged!
You think they'll throw any more shoes at US leadership?!
These are the yes-men Brass left over from the Exxon---er, Bush---er, Cheney---administration who should have taken their oaths "to protect and defend the Constitution and follow only legal orders" seriously enough to save the lives and limbs and minds of 4500 of our finest and countless Iraqis.
Their time is over. They should go.
Of course they don't want to lose control of the situation---Iraq COULD turn into a successful state...
Adm. Mullen's first command was on the USS Noxubee in 1973. I served under him and he was an arrogant bastard then. You don't argue with the captain of a ship under which you serve, and those stooges shouldn't argue with their commander and chief, particularly since he was elected partly because he was going to get us out of Iraq. If they resist too much they need to be replaced with someone who values the citizens of the U.S. and will work their will.
All politicians become willing or unwilling puppets of an oligarchy that pays for their campaigns and demonizes or kills them if they don't bend over and make these oligarchs richer and more powerful, at people's expense.
If Obama is smart, he will take the heat off himself and let We the People decide everything via the referendum. True democracy in action. www.ni4d.us/
I vote to dump and fire every Bush appointee and rescind every Bush law and executive order possible, prosecute the war criminals, make the war profiteers pay us back the taxpayer money they stole and give each American citizen an equal share of the trillion instead of giving it to the criminal institutions and corporations that caused this fiasco.
It appears that Petraeus misunderestimated Obama, so to speak. I doubt that he will be the last to do so.
Obama had better throw that Bush yesman out before Betrayus somehow gets the best of Obama and messes up everything.
This dispute between Pres. Obama and Patraeus, Odierno, and Keane is much bigger than a misunderstanding....it goes to the heart of our democracy, civilian control of the military/corporate weapon merchants and whether not these peacock-like generals will shut-up and take an order from the prez...
it's alarming these arogant generals are acting like fascists by using Keane to intimidate Obama w/ threats and efforts to propagandize...
"There will be a price to be paid to override them." - let's see if they really try it
Is General David Petreaus Destined To Play General Douglas MacArthur To Barack Obama's Harry Truman?
"How would that happen?"
"Just as in the Korean War, where Truman charged General MacArthur with insubordination for having gone directly to Congress in an attempt to undo a truce with China, President Obama could be forced to charge General Petreaus with insubordination if he bypasses the president by going directly to Congress about extending the stay of our troops in Iraq?"
"But would President Obama risk taking on a celebrated war hero?"
"If he's to keep his promise of troops out within 16 months he may have to."
"Wouldn't that be nice."
The Korean War is a good example of the military trying to stop peace talks - even to the point of bombing the peace talk site! Read Wilfred Burchett's fascinating "Memoirs of a Rebel Journalist" to get a new insight into what went on at Hiroshima, the Cold War, the Korean War and the Vietnam War.
And, just from a legal stand point, Obama can't continue an illegal war without getting tarred himself.
Time for Petraeus to take his job at Raytheon.
And you, you lilly-livered-let-other-people-die-for-my-career types, may you be haunted second-by-second by the ghosts of those you've lied to and killed.
fromthemomentyoureadthis
Well, for starters, WE CAN'T AFFORD TO STAY IN IRAQ. The Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has calculated the longterm expense of the Iraq War to be over $3 trillion. How can Gates and Petraeus miss this point? Secondly, we went to all of this expense in lives and money when Iraq was in no way connected with 9/11 or world terrorism. We had no compelling national security issue involved in Iraq. Third, it is not our decision and the Iraqis have clearly stated they want us out. Fourth, the original and legitimate mission in the region was payback for 9/11 and holding those responsible accountable. Iraq has usurped our focus and resources while the original mission has not been completed. Fifth, our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan has become a neverending quagmire. Like Vietnam, it will seriously compromise our military for decades. The loud and clear message from the military leadership of that was is that they wanted no more neverending quagmires that were essentially "mission drift" at the great expense of troop morale. Staying in Iraq simply means pumping out more Iraq War vets with post traumatic stress disorder or with serious physical injuries, many of which will end up homeless or part of the current suicide epidemic.