iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Michael Carmichael

Michael Carmichael

Posted February 1, 2009 | 10:08 PM (EST)

Craddock Scandal Rocks NATO


In the wake of an international scandal mushrooming around the career of US General Bantz John Craddock, American credibility has collapsed inside the top echelons of NATO. General Craddock is the Supreme Allied Commander for Europe (SACEUR) and simultaneously the Commander of the US European Command.

Described as a hard-line partisan deeply committed to the neoconservative ideology of former US President George W. Bush, General Craddock is a controversial commanding officer whose command authority extends to that rather euphemistically termed, "peace-keeping force," operating in Afghanistan known as the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). The political dimensions of the Craddock scandal are slowly emerging, and it now seems likely that European centers of military and political power will succeed in toppling American domination of the aging security organization.

The Craddock scandal erupted upon the public release of his ill-conceived letter ordering the mass execution of thousands of civilians involved in the Afghan trade in illicit drugs. According to European reports, Craddock's order targeted "tens of thousands" Afghani civilians. When NATO officers operating under Craddock's command rejected his order to launch the mass execution of drug-linked civilians (many are poppy farmers), Craddock became incensed at what he deemed a mutinous conspiracy of treacherous insubordination that threatened his command authority.

US General David D. McKiernan is currently in charge of NATO forces in Afghanistan. German General Egon Ramms is the head of the NATO Command Center in Kabul. Both Generals have written letters stating that they do not wish to follow General Craddock's order. To do so would be a violation of international law and would result in a blood bath on a massive scale in Afghanistan. From any perspective, it is difficult to see how western interests could be served by Craddock's macabre order.

In his letter ordering the military to exterminate multitudes of Afghanis from rural poppy farmers to chemists working in clandestine labs to mules to dealers on the unpaved streets of Afghanistan, Craddock defined his startling policy in surprisingly reckless and sweeping terms stating that it is, "no longer necessary to produce intelligence or other evidence that each particular drug trafficker or narcotics facility in Afghanistan meets the criteria of being a military objective." In effect, this declaration of shoot-to-kill orders targeting the illicit drug industry explicitly deleted the military objective of his role as the SACEUR and projected military power directly into the civilian sphere.

The Craddock Order literally granted a license to kill civilians to every NATO soldier under his command and required the soldiers to perpetrate a massacre of Afghani civilians who were merely 'suspected' of involvement in the drug trade. Authorities in international law decry Craddock's Order as a clear violation of a multitude of well-established legal principles. For instance, the International Criminal Court is empowered to prosecute war criminals that order direct attacks against civilians and summary executions.

Following the reports of the Craddock scandal in the popular magazine, Der Spiegel, Germany is the epicenter of the anti-American political outrage. Popular German politicians are now calling for the immediate removal of General Craddock from his post as SACEUR. A conservative, pro-business German politician, Elke Hoff, described her reaction to the Craddock scandal, "What we need is a plan to fight drug cultivation, not a license to kill suspects without any evidence."

There can be little serious doubt that the Craddock scandal will rock the Pentagon and spill over into the political cauldron of Washington, DC. Current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has made what now seem to be problematic statements about military doctrine vis a vis the global drug trade. Last month, Gates stated, "If we have evidence that the drug labs and drug lords are supporting the Taliban, then they're fair game." The legal distinction between Gates' position and Craddock's order might seem tenuous, but it is simply that Gates did not preclude the need for evidence to assassinate civilians in the drug trade, and Craddock granted carte blanche to commit masses of summary executions of the usual suspects sans, "intelligence or other evidence."

In either case, the policy of expanding NATO and the US military doctrine to involve sweeping targeted assassinations and mass executions of foreign civilians allegedly involved in the drug trade clearly represents mission creep of global proportions. Ironically, this expansion of the US War on Drugs comes in the first week of the term of a new president who promised drug reform in a high-profile speech that was reported on the pages of The Huffington Post by the Dean of the Howard University School of Law, Dr. Kurt Schmoke.

There can be little serious doubt that if Craddock's Order were to become US policy it would trigger a new wave of anti-American protests from Afghanistan and Iraq to Colombia, where Plan Colombia is a controversial counter-narcotics operation that the UN, Noam Chomsky and others have criticized as US support for right-wing "death squads."

In the first days of the Obama administration, Afghanistan and Pakistan have already become the scenes of tragedies caused by US drones that killed pockets of civilians. It is interesting to note that in December, 2008 US military doctrine was modified to permit the bombing of drug labs if intelligence suggested that no more than ten civilians would be killed. The timing of these alterations to US military doctrine and rules of engagement raises questions about the expanding role of the US military in a period when a new president has promised troop withdrawals from Iraq and the final phase of US operations in Afghanistan as well as military reform.

During the last phase of the presidential campaign, both Joe Biden and Barack Obama promised - to cool responses - that the US would surge troops in Afghanistan in pursuit of a what President Barack Obama described in his inaugural address as, "a hard-earned peace."

Ten days into the Obama administration, it is already apparent that Afghanistan is morphing into a quagmire strikingly reminiscent of Vietnam. At the same time, the role of the US military is shifting, perhaps, ominously for the hopes of reconstructing the global image of the United States of America in the post-Bush Era.

General Craddock is now said to be contemplating his future while preparing to write his memoires in preparation for his emergence as a neoconservative political candidate following in the footsteps of some of his predecessors as SACEUR: Dwight D. Eisenhower; Alexander Haig, Jr. and Wesley Clark.

Perhaps, General Craddock's campaign strap line will echo Shakespeare: Kill all the Drug Dealers!

In the wake of an international scandal mushrooming around the career of US General Bantz John Craddock, American credibility has collapsed inside the top echelons of NATO. General Craddock is the Su...
In the wake of an international scandal mushrooming around the career of US General Bantz John Craddock, American credibility has collapsed inside the top echelons of NATO. General Craddock is the Su...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 29
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:56 PM on 02/08/2009
WHO WILL RID ME OF THIS TURBULENT GENERAL?

Bravo to those officers who didn't lose their marbles and prefered not to get the long drop on a short rope, after a future Nuremberg 2.0 war crimes trial.

The US would probably prefer that letter NOT be Exhibit 1 at The Hague, in due course.

Any takers for a bet that Craddock is going to have a very unfortunate accident?

There was the car 'accident' that caused a troublesome general's chest to hit the steering wheel and ruptured an artery, in southern Germany, 1945. He bled to death. General Patton.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:48 PM on 02/08/2009
Craddock needs a car 'accident' that causes his chest to hit the steering wheel and ruptures an artery. Oh wait. That was General Patton. In 1945.

Unless, of course, the US would prefer that letter to be Exhibit 1 at The Hague, in due course.

Bravo to those officers who didn't lose their marbles and prefer not to get a long drop on a short rope after a future Nuremberg 2.0 war crimes trial.
01:03 PM on 02/08/2009
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/08/nato-commander-afghanista_n_164973.html

"In an effort to strike at a key income source for Taliban militants, the top NATO commander said Sunday that operations to attack drug lords and labs in Afghanistan will begin within the "next several days.""

(AP article - Sunday 2/8/2009)
08:45 AM on 02/03/2009
If this has been correctly reported this is deeply worrying. If this guy is still in his job in a week it's even more worrying.
Interestingly, at the time of writing I can find no report of this on the BBC News or in the UK press. This is surprising given the relevance to UK forces operating in dangerous territory in southern Afganistan.
07:06 AM on 02/03/2009
"The Craddock Order literally granted a license to kill civilians .... who were merely 'suspected' of involvement in the drug trade."

That's whats so glaringly obvious about neocons, they fight the results, not the underlying cause.
They prefer to sit around the table and swat flies rather than close the screen door.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
King Cashaw
10:05 PM on 02/03/2009
Could not have said it any better. But this is do to a lack of actually caring what the problem is, or the intellectual curiosity to discover the underlying problem. This is why they have the base they do.
04:45 PM on 02/02/2009
The War On Drugs will be written into posterity as The War On Prohibition.

"We are free! Free to not do drugs! Free to murder or incarcerate anyone associated with drugs!"
The Prohibitionist
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
TXfemmom
Grandma with eye on the future
03:03 PM on 02/02/2009
Oh, if Petraeus agrees with this guy, then get rid of him, as well. The entire Officer Corp should have to be called in and be sworn in under their current Commander in Chief, and have it pointed out to them that BUSH IS NOT PRESIDENT AND THERE IS ONE PRESIDENT AT A TIME.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
TXfemmom
Grandma with eye on the future
03:01 PM on 02/02/2009
This guy should be relieved of command and court-martialed, period, enough said. He went far beyond his ability to command and this surely does not represent what Obama, his Commander-in-
Chief wants. The command corp should be cleansed of all neocon sympathizers and it should be done as quickly as possible.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
King Cashaw
10:08 PM on 02/03/2009
This can not work. As one who served in the military, a short stint, and has been around them most of my life, the Command Corp of the military, I argue, is very conservative, if not neocon.
photo
Norge
Rolf K. Artist, worker of metal, writer of poems
02:04 PM on 02/02/2009
Perhaps he should be charged with "Conspirousy To Letter Right Military authorized Genocide".

Though he may have been temporarily insane, certainly sounds as though he had a screw loose in the logics compartment.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ElIngeniero
01:51 PM on 02/02/2009
The phrases "relived of command" and "dishonorable discharge" come to mind.
01:38 PM on 02/02/2009
this is the perfect opportunity to remove robert gates and patraes as well. just get rid of these crazy people!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjc
Avoid printing any..
12:25 PM on 02/02/2009
What are they teaching in the military schools of this country? Good lord, do we need officers like this one? Thankfully, there were some officer who had the guts and ethical principles to refuse to obey the mass killings. But even the whiff of such violent behavior by the American military could prove deadly for more US troops in ANY country. As for NATO, maybe it should be run by Europeans. We are not up to speed to direct multi nationals in an obscure guerrilla war. And Craddock is thinking of running as a "neo conservative" for some office? The other generals who have led multi national forces should never be compared to this turkey, even Haig, though he might be considered a conservative. Craddock will probably have to be in a witness protection program to escape someone wanting his life.
photo
Norge
Rolf K. Artist, worker of metal, writer of poems
03:00 PM on 02/02/2009
Here is one of their schools: http://www.soaw.org where they taught officers of South American countries who eventually lead death squades.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oldchef
Former Executive Chef, tr0ll watcher
10:38 AM on 02/02/2009
General Craddock needs to be relieved of his command, if not drummed out of the military entirely. This reckless and ill considered order would ignite a bloodbath of epic proportions. Farmers involved in the opium trade need another cash crop they can depend on to feed their families. It's mostly not their fault that opium is the only way to feed their families. If we start killing farmers and low level runners as the General directs, the protests following civiian casualties from Predator drone strikes will seem like nothing to what will follow wholesale killing of people with little other choice in their lives.
04:30 PM on 02/02/2009
Last Sunday, Martha Raddatz stated that the opium trade represents about half of Afghanistan's GDP, which means NATO troops are going to be kept real busy if they follow Craddock's orders.
09:51 AM on 02/02/2009
This is probably the result of over work - we know just how hard a desk is when the real action is in the field. I'm sure the general, in his righteous anger, will address this soon and will be seen to have taken leave of his senses.

We've seen what happens when a President abnegates his responsibilities to provide leadership, moral, legal, and political. They may talk a good game but leave all decisions and responsibility to someone else. It was obvious on 9/11 that we had peed-pants cowards in charge and it was confirmed at every stage when they'd take the easy way out; go shopping indeed!

Now we have another one in this individual who seems to mistake blood for bravery, and certitude for leadership. I'd bet he looks good in a uniform too, just like Westmoreland!

I fear for my country to think that General Craddock is the best we can do. These orders are less than adequate on every level but one. They can't be acted upon by troops, they are a disaster to all in Afghanistan but the Taliban, they show a concrete way to quickly lose the war, and they are mind boggling in their savagery. The one thing they may be good for is supporting a diagnosis of the General's mental disorders so that he can receive the professional help, psychiatric and spiritual, that he seems to so desperately require.

And he wants to be a politician? Amazing!
Retromega
Boomerwoman
Momma said there'd be days like this
11:50 AM on 02/02/2009
Maybe he and Sara Palin could run on the same ticket.
12:37 PM on 02/02/2009
Good comment Retromega.
If,..... I say If..... it's necessary to kill 10,000 poppy farmers to stop producing drugs in Afganistan, Craddock should suggest instead to kill 10,000 Americans or any drug users in the world.... We know Economy 101.....Supply and Demand........if there is no demand who is going to produce poppy?
We are living in an hypocritical and crazy world.
08:42 AM on 02/02/2009
So let's just arrest all these poppy farmers, mules, drug lords, chemists and street vendors, and put them in jail, right?

How did they end the opium business in China? (Chop! Chop! Chop!)