Fallon Walks the Plank
For those who might still be wondering whether Admiral William J. Fallon fell or was pushed, the short answer is that he was pushed. The abrupt resignation of Fallon as chief of Central Command last Tuesday was a political maneuver to avoid having to fire him. When Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister of Great Britain, cabinet members who were not fully on board with her policies were described as "wets." By that standard, Fallon was most definitely a wet as he had strong views on the appropriate circumstances for the use of force in the Middle East. As an outspoken man who does not suffer fools gladly, he crossed swords with the White House more than once and was reported to be on extremely unfriendly terms with the top Army commander in Iraq General David Petraeus, whom he had reportedly disparaged as an "ass-kissing little chickenshit."
Fallon's appointment in March 2007 had originally raised some concerns that war was imminent as he is an expert in aircraft carrier operations and it was suggested that he might be taking command to plan an air assault against Iran. Instead, Fallon proved to be the ultimate realist, understanding the vulnerability of American forces in the Persian Gulf region and resisting demands for a more bellicose posture. He also reportedly does not believe that Iraq can be stabilized with a cosmetic infusion of American troops, the so-called surge policy, and in fact wanted more soldiers removed more quickly. He has also been openly critical of the patchwork and uncoordinated efforts to shore up the deteriorating United States strategic relationships in both Pakistan and Afghanistan.
As is often the case, the neo-conservative punditry assisted in bringing down Fallon. Their spokesmen in the media had long since turned on him because of his interest in launching negotiations rather than cruise missiles against Iran. Last week Max Boot wrote "Fallon's very public assurances that America has no plans to use force against Iran embolden the mullahs to continue developing nuclear weapons and supporting terrorist groups that are killing American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan...." Using a classic neocon argument, Boot assumes something to be true and then draws a conclusion. That Iranian supported terrorist groups are killing American soldiers in Iraq and that Iran is continuing to develop nuclear weapons cannot be demonstrated in any objective way and there is, in fact, considerable evidence to the contrary. But that would be damaging to Boot's argument.
Fallon has undeniably made a number of comments about the need to negotiate a political solution to the problems with Iran rather than using force, but his comments are not wildly out of line with those made both by the Secretary of Defense and the president, both of whom insist that the U.S. wants to negotiate. They are also roughly similar to comments by his two predecessors at Centcom, Generals Abizaid and Zinni. The most recent airing of Fallon's views was in an article that appeared in Esquire magazine two weeks ago entitled "The Man Between War and Peace." The article, which stated that the admiral had been single-handedly resisting the push for war, was written with the cooperation of Fallon, though he subsequently denied having said much that was attributed to him. The admiral, interviewed by al-Jazeera several months ago, also said that the "constant drumbeat of conflict" from Washington was not helpful. There have been reports that Fallon also has told some other senior military officers that he would resign if ordered to attack Iran.
The White House has often asserted that it likes open debate of issues and prefers to have generals and admirals who speak their minds, but that is a lie. The list of senior officers who have been replaced by the administration is a long one and nearly all of the changes have come about due to disagreements on policy, not because of incompetence or malfeasance. The White House decided that Fallon was running his own foreign policy and President Bush made the decision to fire him after the Esquire piece appeared, though the intention was to wait a month or so to let him retire quietly, permitting the administration to deny that any disagreement over Iran policy had been the issue.
Vice President Dick Cheney then intervened to move the resignation process forward, arguing that Fallon was a distraction for the Cheney trip to the Middle East, which started on Sunday March 16th. The vice president intended to discuss Iran with Saudi Arabia and other allies in an attempt to harden the line against the Mullahs, but the continued presence of Fallon suggesting that a softer line might be pursued would make Cheney's task much more difficult. Cheney wanted Fallon out immediately, to send the message that there is only one Iran policy and that Cheney is running it. Bush and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates agreed and Fallon was made to walk the plank. The administration hopes that he will enter into his retirement quietly and accept some highly lucrative board memberships with defense contractors that will induce him to continue to keep his mouth shut about Bush policy in the Middle East.
Dick Cheney will now be free to discuss a hard line about Iran without contradiction, though the real purpose of his trip is to convince the Saudis to pump more oil to bring down gas prices. The White House is concerned that $4 a gallon gas will be disastrous for Republican prospects in the upcoming elections as administration policies that have weakened the dollar will rightly be blamed. It is unlikely that Cheney will get much relief from the Saudis, who are moving aggressively to cut their own deal with Iran and are also facing strong resistance from the rest of OPEC to any production increases.
For those who are concerned about the likelihood of war with Iran because of the Fallon resignation, Washington sources believe that little has changed. The U.S. is not capable of attacking anyone at the moment except by bombing, which would solve little and which would open the door to retaliation against U.S. interests worldwide. Barring a provocative move by the Israelis that will draw the U.S. in or a covert operation that unfortunately escalates, the danger of a new war directed against Iran is low. How to deal with the many still festering issues that the Bush administration has left unresolved in the Middle East will be on the watch of the next president, whoever he or she will be.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
This time this administration cannot claim they had wrong intelligence delivered to them. They never did anyway but put the blame there to dupe us. This time they will knowlingly provoke an attack
for whatever reason, I guess just sneazing would be a good start. Where is Reid and Pelosi and
why are they not proceeding with impeachment before we won't ever see peace again.
Fallon walks the plank, and Captain Ahab still walks the White House.
`
Hopefully, the Admiral will tell us more about emporer george
& his neoCon cronies
.
I am only surprised that they didn't use a scandal involving a prostitute to oust Fallon.
That, after all, was what Hitler did to get rid of the Chief of Staff of the German Army who stood in the way of Hitler's aggression.
Oh wait. They used that tactic somewhere else.
Admiral Fallon was right to oppose the surge and the president's dangerous and destructive obsession with Iraq. Where Fallon was mistaken was in giving priority to Afghanistan and Pakistan over radical, murdering genocidal Iran: the epicenter and central bank of global Islamofasc
The president's mistaken policies in the Middle East are starting to show unwanted consequences in the emerging credibility gap between America and moderate Arab states-whose fear of nuclear-soon-to-be Iran exceeds their confidence in America to protect them; and in the ominous rise of Ahmadenijad as the region's great statesman-his unprecedented invitations to address the GCC, to do a Hajj in Mecca and to visit Iraq recalls Hitler's diplomatic triumphs in the 1930s.
Arabs respect men of strength and steel and they see President Bush as having dropped his sword in our conflict with Iran as it daily commits acts of war and terror against our troops with impunity. The president's loss of credibility with Arab leaders explains his disastrous Mid East trip in January where he failed to garner support for an anti-Iran coalition or make head way in resolving the intractable Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Truth is Iran's evil star is rising in the Middle East as our power, influence and prestige decline. Ahead is a time of turmoil and crisis for US foreign policy as Iran progresses toward the goal of regional hegemony and adds the ultimate weapon of death to its arsenal of blood.
Go to http://Apo
"Where Fallon was mistaken was in giving priority to Afghanistan and Pakistan over radical, murdering genocidal Iran:" - Uh??? - the primary reason that Iran is again a regional power in the area is that we destroyed the two Iranian opponents - Iraq and Afghanistan.
Admiral Fallon suggested going after our real enemies in Afghanistan and following them to their hiding places in Pakistan instead of diving into the sinkhole in Iraq so W could one-up his old man.
The principle reason that the Iranians hate our government - I don't accept that they necessarily hate us - is that we have repeatedly interferred in their internal affairs - overthrown their democratically elected government and aided their enemies. You may not remember but we provided a great deal of help to Saddam when he attacked Iran.
The final neocon argument - comparing Ahmadenijad to Hitler - really weak, Cowboy - why I'll even bet that Ahmadenijad isn't even Austrian.
So if Iran is this much of a threat, don't just write essays, join up and get in on the invasion with Dick Cheney and the rest of the neocon horde that will sweep over Iran - no, Cowboy, don't let the US military do your fighting for you - you lead the way. John Wayne would be so proud.
"Arabs respect men of strength and steel"
Note to Apollo: Iranians are not Arabs, they're Persian.
And is a profoundly racist statement.
What claptrap. As Fallon has not yet spoken out about his resignation, all you have is wild-eyed speculation. I presume that you believe that Truman railroaded a straight-talking thinker because he fired MacArthur? Serving at the President's pleasure, and with the Congress' approval, a flag officer has a duty to his men. Once he cannot do that duty, or if his personal feelings interfere with his ability to do his duty, then his duty becomes resignation. Our Constitution deliberately keeps the military separate from politics, for good reason!
Fallon is in his 60's, having served for 41 years. He could just be tired. Get over yourself.
Semper fi
I don't know how long you were in the Marine Corps (if you actually were), but I retired from the Navy with over 21 years of service. No one, not a CPO or an Admiral, is able to retire in such short order. It took me several months from time of requeest to retire to actual separation date. Only those who are being forced out are able to go so quickly.
Those who sign off their comments with Semper Fi, or Simper, Fido are truly suspect. Kind of like someone who's never been in the service going to the Army-Navy store to buy used fatigues to wear on Armed Forces Day.
When you are an Admiral serving (I believe) his fourth term as a four-star, the rules don't exist. I worked for Admiral Fallon and Admiral Fargo before him. As we were on a trip to Korea, which was supposed to be Admiral Fargo's last trip before his retirement ceremony, the SECDEF called and told him that he could not retire and was going to be extended. I know i am not telling you anything new, but officers of all ranks can be fired or resign. Knowing Admiral Fallon personally I truly believe he resigned because of the reason he gave -- he felt it was creating too much of a distraction and would adversely affect our nation's ability to operate in the middle east. --Go Navy--
let him walk the plank. we have an imperialist military that is fast becoming a mercenary army to conduct our wars for profits.
only when the economy tanks will americans think about changing their war mongering wars for profits status or they may just crank up another war hoping to surge our economy.
when commieism failed i knew we would be right behind them. both economic systems go against spiritual laws but in this country it is about religious dogma not spiritual laws.
"A nation that spends more year after year on military offense (and I mean offense) than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death". (Gunnels)
Standing accused of emboldening a mullah, Admiral Fallon walks the plank of free speech. Bush only listens to generals on the ground, not admirals in the seas. - and only then to generals who only say what he wants to hear.
Great article and very enlightening. Adm. Fallon is a true leader and will make a fine replacement for gawddam Dick Cheney.
thank you for your great article about Sibel Edmonds, which I wish were reprinted here.
Move William, you're standing in the way of shock and awe and blood and gore!
It's not as though your children where getting picked off like fish in a barrel!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
