[THS] The Pentagon's Double Envelopment of President Barack Obama

[The Harder Stuff in news and commentary]

http://www.truth-out.org/the-pentagons-double-envelopment-president-barack-obama62876

The Pentagon's Double Envelopment of President Barack Obama

Wednesday 01 September 2010

by: Melvin A. Goodman, t r u t h o u t | News Analysis

photo
(Image: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: randomduck, Barack Obama)

The "double envelopment" or pincer movement is a classic military maneuver that
finds the flanks of the opponent under simultaneous attack from the opposing forces.
The maneuver may have been used as early as the Battle of Marathon in the fifth
century BC, and there are accounts of Hannibal using the double envelopment at the
Battle of Cannae in 216 BC. Gen. Robert E. Lee used the technique successfully in the
Second Battle of Bull Run in 1862, when the Confederate forces threatened the lines
of communication between the Union forces and the political leadership in
Washington. The German Sixth Army was a victim of double envelopment at the
Battle of Stalingrad in 1942, and Gen. George Patton used the technique successfully
against German forces in World War II.

Now, President Barack Obama finds himself the victim of a political double
envelopment in which the Pentagon, having ostensibly agreed to a strategy calling
for discussion of withdrawal from Afghanistan, is already campaigning and planning
for an extended stay. On one flank, the Pentagon is undertaking a huge base
expansion program that will support a regional military strategy against Russia, China
and Iran. On the other flank, the senior military leadership is walking away from any
notion of even gradual withdrawal beginning in 2011.

President Obama seemed reluctant last year when he announced his decision to
enlarge the US military presence in Afghanistan. He demonstrated his uncertainty by
combining the decision to send an additional 30,000 soldiers and Marines with a
commitment to begin discussions for withdrawal in December of this year in order to
begin a withdrawal process in July 2011. Vice President Joe Biden strongly opposed
the decision to expand the force presence, but he was outflanked by Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who received predictably
strong support from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) and senior
general officers.

Now, one general after another is walking away from any discussion of a major
review of policy, let alone withdrawal, with on-the-record comments in support of an
extended stay in Afghanistan. The Pentagon's campaign began two weeks with Gen.
David Petraeus, the commander of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, arguing that
he had not come to Afghanistan to preside over a "graceful exit." General Petraeus
indicated that his support for any decision to begin the withdrawal of forces next
summer would depend on how the war was proceeding. He presumably believes that
he can repeat the success of the surge in Iraq, which he campaigned for in 2007.

In the wake of General Petraeus' remarks, Gen. James Conway, the commandant of
the Marine Corps, said that President Obama's July 2011 deadline to begin US troop
withdrawal was "giving our enemy sustenance." General Conway seemed to be
particularly dismissive of any discussion of withdrawal, noting that President Obama
was "talking to several audiences at the same time when he made his comments
regarding July 2011." The US commander in charge of training Afghan security
forces, Gen. William Caldwell IV, told Pentagon reporters on August 23 that he will
not complete his mission of training an Afghan force until after the deadline.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mike Mullen has been the most aggressive military
leader in making the case for a long-term commitment to Afghanistan. And General
McChrystal probably should have been fired for insubordination in the fall of 2009
when he rejected the idea of using drone aircraft and special forces to defeat al-
Qaeda before a final decision had been made.

This is very much different from the private comments of the military leadership to
President Obama last year when he conducted his high-level review of Afghan policy.
In the Oval Office in October 2009, Secretary of Defense Gates and Admiral Mullen
pledged their support to President Obama's plan and committed themselves to
making sure that Generals McChrystal and Petraeus would stop their public discussion
of the policy debate. Vice Chairman of the JCS, Gen. James Cartwright, also pledged
fealty. And in late November, only days before the West Point speech, President
Obama asked General Petraeus if he was certain of progress over the next 18 months
that would allow the withdrawal to begin in 2011. Gates, Mullen and Petraeus agreed
that it could be done and that the Afghan Army could take over the mission at that
time.

The pace of US military construction in Afghanistan certainly does not suggest an
interest or expectation of an early withdrawal. Major expansion is taking place at
three US air bases in southern and northern Afghanistan and none of these projects
is expected to be completed before the latter part of 2011. In other words, long after
President Obama has pledged to begin the withdrawal of US forces, the Pentagon is
allocating hundreds of millions of dollars for air bases in key regions. The House of
Representatives has already approved more than $1 billion for additional base
construction in addition to the more than $5 billion allocated to build facilities for the
Afghan Army and the national police. Neither Afghan institution has demonstrated
that it can maintain security in the country, let alone take on the growing Taliban
forces.

President Obama has learned some harsh lessons about civilian-military relations over
the past year. The secretary of defense and the Pentagon's military leadership are
working energetically to undermine the president's call for an end to the cynical
policy of "don't ask, don't tell," which undermined the role of gays serving in the
military. When the Obama administration was discussing Afghan policy at the highest
levels last year, senior general officers campaigned for a significant expansion of US
forces long before any decision was actually made. General McChrystal was
eventually forced to resign as commander of US forces in Afghanistan because he
and his staff were contemptuous toward civilian decision makers.

The president denied that he was "jammed" by the military in the fall of 2009 when
the toughest decision of his presidency had to be made. It is clear, however, that the
military is trying to manipulate President Obama on the next round of decision
making. It was 50 years ago that President Dwight D. Eisenhower told his senior
advisers, "God help this country when someone sits in this chair who doesn't know
the military as well as I do."