From Politico:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates publicly rebuked Gen. Stanley McChrystal Tuesday, saying in a statement that the top commander in Afghanistan had “made a significant mistake and exercised poor judgment” in the biting remarks he and his aides made in a Rolling Stone article about President Barack Obama and others in the administration.

The statement from Gates followed news that McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, has been summoned to the White House to explain the comments published in a Rolling Stone article.

President Barack Obama has to relieve Gen. McChrystal of his command.  I don’t really see how this ends any other way.  I guess McChrystal could tender his resignation, but even that would be a slap in the face to the Office of the President.  If McChrystal did not have faith in his civilian leadership, he should have resigned.  Civilian control of the military is one of the pillars of this Republic.  To disrespect the commander-in-chief in such a blatant manner is an affront to the Office of the President and borders on insubordination.

There is clearly a perception within the U.S. military–in the officer corps and among the enlisted ranks–that this president is a weak commander-in-chief (which, I believe, is justified).  He won the Democratic nomination by campaigning that he would have the U.S. out of Iraq within 16 months of being elected, remember?  He doesn’t believe that the U.S. is at war with Islamic extremism and his conduct of U.S. foreign policy has been amateur, at best.  Further, his decision to place additional stress on the force by repealing “Don’t ask, don’t tell” while fighting two wars is more than problematic.  Still, he is the president.  If he does not fire Gen. McChrystal, Obama will only reinforce the perception that he is a weak and indecisive leader.

According to Byron York, “…the bigger problem with McChrystal’s leadership has always been the general’s devotion to unreasonably restrictive rules of engagement that are resulting in the unnecessary deaths of American and coalition forces.”  York makes a good point here, but the general is merely an accomplice to a failed policy.  In enforcing these restrictive rules of engagement, McChrystal is following the guidance passed down by the Obama White House.  These rules of engagement put U.S. troops at risk.  You can’t win a war with one hand tied behind your back.  Here’s an excerpt from the article.

One soldier shows me the list of new regulations the platoon was given. “Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force,” the laminated card reads. For a soldier who has traveled halfway around the world to fight, that’s like telling a cop he should only patrol in areas where he knows he won’t have to make arrests. “Does that make any f–king sense?” Pfc. Jared Pautsch. “We should just drop a f–king bomb on this place. You sit and ask yourself:  What are we doing here?”

It is odd that a four-star general would give such access to a media outlet.  Even if some of the comments were “off the record,” it is peculiar that he would trust a  journalist from Rolling Stone, or any media outlet for that matter.  Maybe this was an elaborate plan to force a confrontation with the White House.  I don’t know.  Regardless, it puts the president in a tough spot.  While the first order impact of this article is the McChrystal fallout, I hope it shines renewed light on the overall mismanagement of the war in Afghanistan and how the current rules of engagement are putting American lives at risk.  If that’s how this White House wants to prosecute this war, then we shouldn’t be there.

I agree with most of what McChrystal and his staff said in the article, but I’m not a general officer in the United States Army currently running a war.  I’m a private citizen and there’s a big difference.  I’m not part of the chain of command.  The bottom line is that if he disagreed with Obama’s policies he should have resigned.  Making these comments while in uniform was not the way to go.  Do you think this whole episode will help or hinder morale?  If you were on the ground in Afghanistan and you found out that your commanding general thinks the president is a dolt and bungling the war–how are you doing going to react?  The efficacy of any military organization depends largely on strict adherence to the chain of command.  Some pundits will relish this episode as an example of Obama’s poor leadership and disconnect from the military (I don’t think this would be happening if it were President McCain).  But I believe this issue is bigger than Obama or McChrystal.  It really has to do with the Office of the President, the Constitution, and how we think about civil-military relations in this country.