THE FALLON DEPARTURE

JUSTIN RAIMONDO, ANTIWAR - "If, in the dying light of the Bush administration, we go to war with Iran," says the March Esquire, "it'll all come down to one man. If we do not go to war with Iran, it'll come down to the same man." The piece describes this top military figure as the last obstacle to the Bush administration's persistent push for war with Iran: "It's left to" him and him "alone . . . to argue that, as he told al-Jazeera last fall: 'This constant drumbeat of conflict . . . is not helpful and not useful. I expect that there will be no war, and that is what we ought to be working [for].'"

That was Adm. William "Fox" Fallon speaking, top U.S. commander in the Middle East, last of the Vietnam vets in the high command, and, yes, the very same Adm. Fallon who has just submitted his resignation as head of Central Command. What makes this particularly ominous is that, according to former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst Patrick Lang, Fallon told him, upon taking over at Centcom, that war with Iran "isn't going to happen on my watch." Lang asked him how he thought he could stop it: "'I have options, you know,' Fallon responded, which Lang interpreted as implying Fallon would step down rather than follow orders he considers mistaken.". . . In a statement, Fallon hinted at the reason for his resignation:

"Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time and hamper efforts in the Centcom region. And although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command Area of Responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there.". . .

He's been in hot water with administration hawks – including the president, wildest hawk of them all – before. Last fall, he was quoted by Pentagon insiders as calling Gen. David Petraeus an "ass-kissing little chickensh*t" for telling the president what he wanted to hear on Iraq and the "surge." Long an advocate of engagement with China as well as Iran, Fallon has been relentlessly attacked by the neocons as "soft and accommodating." .

NY TIMES Across the officer corps, a large number of senior military leaders share Admiral Fallon's broad assessment that a war with Iran would bring unexpected and, perhaps, unmanageable, risks elsewhere in the Muslim world and around the globe. But many said they agreed that once it became clear he had lost the confidence of his civilian bosses, it was the responsibility of the four-star admiral to retire. That was especially so, they said, as it became obvious that no great effort was being made by civilian leaders to persuade him to remain in command.

At the same time, some younger officers who have been critical of senior commanders for not speaking up about the risks of invading Iraq now see a senior officer who did speak his mind publicly being prompted to choose early retirement. . .
. .

LA TIMES Supporters of the administration's troop buildup have criticized Fallon for pushing for an accelerated reduction of U.S. forces in Iraq. By doing so, they argued, Fallon undermined the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus. "He fought Petraeus every step of the way, creating unrealistic demands and extra work," said a former senior Pentagon official who has worked directly with both men. "And in so doing, he was not only undermining Petraeus, he was failing to support the president's policy." Despite the increasingly heated bickering, Fallon's decision, representing the departure of a combatant commander in wartime, stunned even senior officers. . .

A senior Pentagon official said that while the Esquire piece was a final straw, Fallon repeatedly had angered administration officials with his public comments. In one instance, Fallon allowed a New York Times reporter into a meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, a decision that made Maliki uncomfortable and seemed to upset President Bush. This month, Fallon testified before Congress that Turkey must reach "accommodation" with the Kurdistan Workers Party, a group the U.S. has labeled a terrorist organization.
"The Esquire piece had a big impact," the official said. "But I think it is merely the most recent in a series of pieces that have left people with the impression that Fallon is out of step with the administration."

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, a senior Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said Fallon's resignation was a sign that the Bush administration was unwilling to tolerate dissent

WHAT FALLON HAS SAID

From the National Security Network

Fallon's Differences with Petraeus: Fallon "has been saying from Day One, 'This [the surge] isn't working,'" and "The profoundly different views of the U.S. role in Iraq only exacerbated the schism between the two men. 'Bad relations?" said a senior civilian official with a laugh. "That's the understatement of the century. If you think Armageddon was a riot, that's one way of looking at it.'" [Washington Post, 9/9/2007]

Fallon Built Alternative Plan for Substantial Withdrawal by 2010: Last September, "President Bush listened to contrasting visions of the U.S. future in Iraq. Gen. David H. Petraeus dominated the conversation by video link from Baghdad, making the case to keep as many troops as long as possible to cement any security progress. Adm. William J. Fallon, his superior, argued instead for accepting more risks in Iraq, officials said, in order to have enough forces available to confront other potential threats in the region." The discussion "masked a sharper clash over the U.S. venture in Iraq, one that has been building since Fallon, chief of the U.S. Central Command, which oversees Middle East operations, sent a rear admiral to Baghdad this summer to gather information. Soon afterward, officials said, Fallon began developing plans to redefine the U.S. mission and radically draw down troops." [Washington Post, 9/9/2007]

Fallon Admits that Limiting Our Combat Mission Key: "Fallon is also said to believe that giving the Iraqi government a clearer sense that the U.S. troop commitment is limited would help spur the Iraqis to pass legislation and take other steps aimed at achieving reconciliation among the warring sectarian factions in Iraq." [IHT, 9/7/07]

Fallon More Aggressive on Substantial Troop Reductions: Adm. Fallon stated that he would like to see the U.S. "transfer more and more responsibility for security in Iraq to Iraqi security forces and, at the same time, withdrawing a substantial amount of our combat forces." While he favors a pause in troop reductions, he believes it should be "temporary and brief". According to the NY Times, "Admiral Fallon's comments struck a somewhat different tone from the one voiced privately by Bush administration officials who have said they advocate holding to troop levels before the 'surge' for some months, perhaps even until the end of the administration." [NYT, 2/28/2008; AP, 2/25/2008]

Fallon Favors Focusing on Regional Threats in Afghanistan: After very brief troop reduction pause in Iraq, Fallon wants a "resumption of withdrawals to ease stress on the overall military and allow him to balance deployments across the volatile region." He also stated that he hoped to add "a couple of thousand" military trainers to support Afghan Army and police forces. However, he did acknowledge that more troops in Afghanistan are not enough and that the strategy and execution need to improve. "Could we do better with a few more folks? Of course. But the real challenge is: Where is the economic viability for this place?" [NYT, 2/28/2008]

Iran Despite recent developments that indicate that Iran has become more cooperative, and that back-channel correspondence has been productive, the Bush administration has continued to refuse broader engagement. An Iraqi government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said that the Iranian government "had helped to persuade the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr to ask his Mahdi militia to halt attacks." These comments "echoed those of the American military here, who in recent days have gone out of their way to publicly acknowledge Iran's role in helping to slow the flow of weapons into the country." CENTCOM Commander, Adm. William J. Fallon has described the bellicose rhetoric on Iran from the Bush administration as "not particularly helpful." [NY Times, 11/18/07. Los Angeles Times, 12/01/07]