His Authority Reasserted, Obama’s Position on Afghanistan Remains Unclear
It was surely "one of the most decisive — and dramatic — acts [taken by Barack Obama] in his young presidency," according to Time: Wednesday, June 23, Obama dismissed his top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, after his disparaging remarks about the administration reported in Rolling Stone magazine. Obama replaced him immediately with another experienced officer, Gen. David Petraeus, who currently leads American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The decision was made with "regret but also with certainty," according to Barack Obama's own words. The Washington Post tells the inside story of the dismissal, decided less than two days after the disclosure of Gen. McChrystal's words. "For 36 hours, he flirted with a Carter-esque response - expressing anger in words but not deeds - before finally taking decisive action," explains the newspaper. “I welcome debate among my team, but I won't tolerate division," said Obama.
What Impact for the Strategy in Afghanistan?
For The Christian Science Monitor, the American president reinforced by this decision his role as "civil Commander-in-Chief of the army." The McChrystal affair constituted a new affront to his leadership, and this after weeks of criticism over his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, which last week forced him to address the nation from the Oval Office. Obama, therefore, had to act quickly to reestablish his authority.
But the fact of switching men at the head of the American Army in Afghanistan does not settle the question of military strategy. Time notes thus, "The drama of the past 36 hours ultimately may have little impact on America's national security." On its political blog, the periodical recalls the date fixed by the American Armed Forces to begin the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan: July 2011— A deadline that is rapidly approaching, while Afghan forces are far from being ready for a transfer of power.
"Chaos-istan"
Obama's superseding of McChrystal ought to allow posing the question of "the incoherence of the Obama administration's strategy [in Afghanistan]," judges The Huffington Post, who emphasizes that, at several points, McChrystal publicly criticized his civil superiors and denounced their "shortsighted" approach, in particular by their desire to establish a "counterterrorism" strategy - which, according to McChrystal, could not but lead to a "Chaos-istan."
For Politico, the choice of Gen. Petraeus as McChrystal's replacement is that of a "strong political player whom advocates of continued U.S. military action in Afghanistan hoped would be in place as the 2011 deadline for beginning withdrawal of U.S. troops begins to slip.” Indeed, Petraeus is reputed to be close to the Republicans and favorable to ongoing military action.
At the moment, it is impossible to say whether Barack Obama will regain control of the situation in Afghanistan. His strategy will be judged in July 2011, depending on whether the calendar fixed by the American administration is respected.
The decision was made with "regret but also with certainty," according to Barack Obama's own words. The Washington Post tells the inside story of the dismissal, decided less than two days after the disclosure of Gen. McChrystal's words. "For 36 hours, he flirted with a Carter-esque response - expressing anger in words but not deeds - before finally taking decisive action," explains the newspaper. “I welcome debate among my team, but I won't tolerate division," said Obama.
What Impact for the Strategy in Afghanistan?
For The Christian Science Monitor, the American president reinforced by this decision his role as "civil Commander-in-Chief of the army." The McChrystal affair constituted a new affront to his leadership, and this after weeks of criticism over his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, which last week forced him to address the nation from the Oval Office. Obama, therefore, had to act quickly to reestablish his authority.
But the fact of switching men at the head of the American Army in Afghanistan does not settle the question of military strategy. Time notes thus, "The drama of the past 36 hours ultimately may have little impact on America's national security." On its political blog, the periodical recalls the date fixed by the American Armed Forces to begin the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan: July 2011— A deadline that is rapidly approaching, while Afghan forces are far from being ready for a transfer of power.
"Chaos-istan"
Obama's superseding of McChrystal ought to allow posing the question of "the incoherence of the Obama administration's strategy [in Afghanistan]," judges The Huffington Post, who emphasizes that, at several points, McChrystal publicly criticized his civil superiors and denounced their "shortsighted" approach, in particular by their desire to establish a "counterterrorism" strategy - which, according to McChrystal, could not but lead to a "Chaos-istan."
For Politico, the choice of Gen. Petraeus as McChrystal's replacement is that of a "strong political player whom advocates of continued U.S. military action in Afghanistan hoped would be in place as the 2011 deadline for beginning withdrawal of U.S. troops begins to slip.” Indeed, Petraeus is reputed to be close to the Republicans and favorable to ongoing military action.
At the moment, it is impossible to say whether Barack Obama will regain control of the situation in Afghanistan. His strategy will be judged in July 2011, depending on whether the calendar fixed by the American administration is respected.