Afstan: The McCrystal watch continues

Further to this post,

...Gen. McChrystal and more about hitting the fan

1) From the Washington Post:

McChrystal Request to Reach Pentagon by End of the Week

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal's request for more troops and other resources to fund the expanded counterinsurgency campaign he has proposed in Afghanistan will arrive at the Defense Department by the end of this week but will not be immediately turned over to the White House, a Pentagon spokesman said Wednesday.

"It is simply premature to consider additional resources until General McChrystal's assessment has been fully reviewed and discussed by the president and his team," spokesman Geoff Morrell said.

President Obama's national security team is still in the preliminary stages of considering the Aug. 30 assessment by McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, that the war will probably be lost unless more troops are sent there within the next year.

Senior administration officials have said that McChrystal's report is only one "input" the White House is considering in a more wide-ranging review of strategy, including a possible shift from counterinsurgency in Afghanistan toward stepped-up attacks against al-Qaeda in Pakistan and elsewhere [emphasis added].

"There are many other considerations that we have to take into account," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said on PBS's "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer" on Monday [see 2) here]. "There are other assessments from very expert military analysts who have worked in counterinsurgencies that are the exact opposite" of McChrystal's...

Obama's determination not to be rushed in deciding the way forward has led to frustration within the military, where many argue that McChrystal's request -- and trying to reverse the momentum gained by the Taliban this year -- is necessary and urgent...

Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, said Wednesday that he and the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen, had endorsed "General McChrystal's assessment" of the situation in Afghanistan. Petraeus spoke at a counterinsurgency conference at the National Press Club.

Morrell, in a briefing for reporters at the Pentagon, said administration discussions on Afghanistan were awaiting the return of Obama and other senior officials from the U.N. General Assembly meeting in New York and the Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh this week. "Once he gets back to town," Morrell said of the president, "the discussions will resume in earnest . . . but without rushing it."..

So Gen. Petraeus and Adm. Mullen are on Gen. McChystal's side. Moving towards a real showdown between the brass hats and frock coats? Things might get pretty serious.

2) While in the NY Times:

Top General Denies Rift With Obama on Afghan War [Well, he would wouldn't he?]

The senior American commander in Afghanistan on Wednesday rejected any suggestion that his grim assessment of the war had driven a wedge between the military and the Obama administration, but he warned against taking too long to settle on a final strategy [emphasis added, but see Morrell quote above]...

“A policy debate is warranted,” General McChrystal said in a telephone interview from his headquarters in Kabul.

“We should not have any ambiguities, as a nation or a coalition,” he added. “At the end of the day, we’re putting young people in harm’s way.”

President Obama’s top advisers are rethinking the strategy that Mr. Obama unveiled in March, amid a growing political divide in the United States over how to proceed and confusion among allies that have fighting forces in Afghanistan.

General McChrystal would not address how many additional combat troops he would seek in a request he is preparing to send to the Defense Department...

General McChrystal said he agreed to speak to The New York Times on Wednesday after he became increasingly concerned about reports of rifts between the military and the civilian leadership, and about rumors he was considering resigning if his assessment was not accepted.

The general denied that he had discussed — or even considered — resigning his command, as had been whispered about at the Pentagon, saying that he was committed to carrying out whatever mission Mr. Obama approved.

“I believe success is achievable,” he said. “I can tell you unequivocally that I have not considered resigning at all [emphasis added].”

The general said that after submitting his report, he had been directed to provide more information and respond to several questions, including on perhaps the thorniest issue: the impact of the flawed Afghan presidential election. Allegations of widespread ballot fraud have raised serious doubts about the legitimacy of President Hamid Karzai as a partner in the counterinsurgency campaign...

Even in advance of any decisions by the Obama administration, General McChrystal said he was taking steps to reshape the war effort in Afghanistan, including changing the way coalition forces develop Afghanistan’s own security forces.

While there are a range of opinions in Congress on whether to send more combat troops, there is broad support for making a priority of building up Afghanistan’s army and police force.

General McChrystal said he had ordered allied forces working with Afghan soldiers and police officers to go beyond organizing, training and equipping local forces; American and NATO units now try to build “a full-time partnership” with local forces, expanding the relationship to include living side by side, combining their planning efforts and going out on operations together [emphasis added, how many Euro ISAF members are going to be willing to do that?].

Note that "warning" and compare it with what the frocks are saying. Hmmm. Policy positioning like that by the senior Canadian military (even former CDS Gen. Hillier, and even the British, though they are being fairly vocal--see here, here and here) is simply inconceivable. And I'm a bit wary about the extent it is developing in the US. A real public showdown with serving officers can, it seems to me, only hurt the war effort overall.