Why Clark Got Canned
Newsweek has the scoop on why Clark was sacked as NATO CinC. Apparently, he was less than forthcoming with his superiors in the Pentagon during the Kosovo campaign:
Clark ran afoul of Cohen [then Defense Secretary] and Shelton [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] by being less than totally forthcoming in morning conference calls during the Kosovo war in the spring of 1999. From his NATO headquarters in Brussels, Clark wanted to wage the war more aggressively, but back in the Pentagon, Cohen and Shelton were more cautious. They would give Clark instructions on, for instance, the scale of the bombing campaign. "Clark would say, 'Uh-huh, gotcha'," says NEWSWEEK's source. But then he would pick up the phone and call [British Prime Minister] Tony Blair and [Secretary of State] Madeleine [Albright]." As Clark knew full well, Blair and Albright were more hawkish than Shelton and Cohen. After talking to the State Department and NATO allies, Clark would have a different set of marching orders, says the source, who has spoken about the matter with both Cohen and Clark. "Then, about 1 o'clock, the Defense Department would hear what Clark was up to, and Cohen and Shelton would be furious."
Shelton had commented shortly after Clark entered the race that he had been fired from his position for "integrity and character issues." The article also says:
As an ambitious officer, Clark gained a reputation among his peers for telling different people what they wanted to hear, without seeming to realize that his listeners might later compare notes and accuse Clark of being two-faced.
This jibes with what my friends in the military have said about Clark. I have a feeling that this revelation won't have much impact in New Hampshire, as it is still rather vague. I don't see Clark having much chance unless he finishes at least second in the primary, otherwise he's toast. He could be aiming for VP, though it's still beyond my feeble powers of comprehension why anyone one would want the job.
on
| § 3
§ 3 Comments
[ You're too late, comments are closed ]
So a pair of weenies sitting
So a pair of weenies sitting on their asses in Washington got pissed that their commander on the scene did what he thought was right, under the circumstances. What they're really pissed about is that he went over their heads. After reading John Boyd's story, I know that it's the thing that pisses off the military brass more than anything. Sadly, it's the only way to get the military's head out of its own ass, sometimes.
It might make a good deal of sense to read Clark's side of the story. I have his book downstairs, and I can pick it up and get the gist of it.
In "Waging Modern War", Gen
In "Waging Modern War", Gen Clark devotes alot of ink describing how he felt he had to execute his mission as an American general AND NATO leader. At times the two were very nearly opposed, but Clark was responsible as both.
Even after reading his book, I'm still not entirely sure how the sick and twisted NATO command structure works in wartime. But he did make clear how it would be possible to successfully execute the mission yet still not please his chain(s) of command.
Shelton doesn't like Clark because Clark is a bit of a fancy lad, what with his book learnin' an' all; Hugh Shelton is a combination of Nick Fury (including all of his Howlin' Commandos), Sgt. Rock, and yes, goddamn it, a giant fighting robot. I doubt it's much more complex that that.
What the press fails to appreciate is that noone becomes a general of any rank, let alone a full, 4-star general, unless he has his shit together politically; you can have all the talent and skill on Earth, but you don't reach those starred heights unless you've politicked your way there. Coupled with his tour as NATO CINC, coaxing fussy allies into doing what needed to be done, there is no quesiton in my mind that Clark has the political skills needed to be a successful President.
We'll never know for sure, of course, but I'd rather him than John "Apocalypse Not" Kerry.
Bottom line is that Shelton
Bottom line is that Shelton and Cohen couldn't perceive what was happening in Kosovo as anything but an extension of American power. In a very real sense it was, but the international coalition needed to be held together. America was not the only power involved; an order could not simply be given in the Pentagon, and that order carried out by soldiers of another nation.
Clark was the man on the spot who needed to find a way through all that.
It seems to me that a guy as smart as Clark _knows_ what's going to happen when the war's over. It happens to military guys quite a bit. They do the "right thing", which wasn't the "expected thing", and their careers are destroyed as a result. That's par for the course.
Clark _knew_ that his decisions as NATO leader would come back to haunt him, and they did.
He did the right thing anyway. I think that's worth something. And I get tired of criticism that calls it a "character issue" to go against the grain of your commanders.