Anti-War General Flip Flops on the Surge

One of the Iraq War's harshest military critics, retired General John Batiste, has changed his mind and come out in support of the new counterinsurgency strategy.

In a joint Op-Ed in the Washington Post with Pete Hegseth, executive director of Vets for Freedom, Batiste, who was a board member of the anti-war group Votevets.org, gives some of his reasons for the change of heart:

First, the United States must be successful in the fight against worldwide Islamic extremism. We have seen this ruthless enemy firsthand, and its global ambitions are undeniable. This struggle, the Long War, will probably take decades to prosecute. Failure is not an option.

Second, whether or not we like it, Iraq is central to that fight. We cannot walk away from our strategic interests in the region. Iraq cannot become a staging ground for Islamic extremism or be dominated by other powers in the region, such as Iran and Syria. A premature or precipitous withdrawal from Iraq, without the requisite stability and security, is likely to cause the violence there -- which has decreased substantially but is still present -- to cascade into an even larger humanitarian crisis.

Third, the counterinsurgency campaign led by Gen. David Petraeus is the correct approach in Iraq. It is showing promise of success and, if continued, will provide the Iraqi government the opportunities it desperately needs to stabilize its country.

Michael Goldfarb sums up the significance of the switch: There are two stories here: 1) A formerly anti-war general flips on supporting the war, and now believes Petraeus has the right strategy; and 2) Batiste has left VoteVets.org, and the antiwar movement, and joined up with the pro-troop, pro-surge, pro-victory Vets for Freedom.

The antiwar movement has lost one of its most powerful voices today, and it will be interesting to see whether they turn on one of their own, or come around to the view, supported by a preponderance of evidence, that the surge is working.

It is doubtful that Batiste's former colleagues at VoteVets will change their positions given that they are based on wild conspiracy theories on why we are fighting the war and a healthy dose of Bush hatred. Nevertheless, the defection of one of their highest profile military officers is extremely significant.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/12/antiwar_general_flip_flops_on.html at December 09, 2007 - 01:04:12 PM EST

Batiste Needs a New Mirror
timothymathews.com ^ | May 15, 2006 | Timothy Mathews

Commanding the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq may have been the first endeavor that Major General John Batiste (U.S. Army, Retired) ever undertook in which he was not, in his mind, wildly successful. It seems that he does not know how to cope with this. Rather than looking in the mirror in search of someone to blame, General Batiste continues to make headlines by publicly calling for the resignation of Secretary Rumsfeld.

Most recently his face graced the front page of The Wall Street Journal in an article titled The Two-Star Rebel. The article recounts the moral soul searching that he did while wrestling with ideals of professionalism as he considered his potential effect upon the state of civil-military relations. It is tough to doubt his sincerity. His sincerity, however, is a result of the good General fooling himself into thinking that his frustrations in Iraq were due to a lack of support from superiors, rather than his failure to put a thick-soled desert boot into the rear ends of his staff officers and subordinate commanders.

General Batiste’s most frequent criticisms of Secretary Rumsfeld have been in regard to insufficient funds for infrastructure repair and inadequate troop strength. He takes particular issue with Rumsfeld for his insistence to keep troop strength low, in spite of pleas from subordinates. Neither of these criticisms hold any water, but General Batiste has probably grown to believe these claims because they are trumpeted almost daily by the establishment media as the root of what many want to characterize as a quagmire in Iraq. Let us address these issues one at a time.

First, let us tackle the funding issue. The Wall Street Journal writes that when Paul Wolfowitz visited Iraq in June 2004, “Gen. Batiste said that his division had spent $41 million in three months on rebuilding. It had $23 million left for the remaining six months of the year. That wasn’t enough, he says…” Fast forward only two months later, to August 27, 2004. General Batiste held a press conference in Tikrit, Iraq to announce that $2 Billion had been earmarked for the Salah ad Din Province. “This is a huge amount of money and a gift from the U.S. taxpayers,” Batiste said. Clearly that problem was solved. General Batiste presented a problem to his superiors and he got what he asked for. It is tough to see what General Batiste’s beef is in regard to funding.

Next, let us look at the troop strength issue. This was addressed very well in a TCS Daily article in October 2005, titled We Have Enough Troops: A Soldier Explains. But that article was about Iraq in general. Let us take a look at just the 1st Infantry Division while commanded by General Batiste in 2004. The Soldiers of the 1st infantry Division lived at several Forward Operating Bases throughout the Salah Ad Din province of Iraq.

Here is a snapshot of life at FOB Danger in Tikrit: “‘Thai boxing’ classes every Thursday night at 1900 and step aerobics and kickboxing classes Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 0600… a sports bar, an internet cafe and a movie theater. The sports bar features two big screen
televisions, billiards tables, a bar stocked with snacks and beverages, and a ‘Music Night’ every Friday, Saturday and Sunday from 1930-0100. The movie theater shows three movies a day, the internet cafe has several video game systems and computers for soldiers to check their e-mail.
The bazaar sells CDs, DVDs, clothes and other souvenirs…” and there was “an open microphone comedy competition for amateur comics.”

Here are a couple of photos of the overworked Soldiers at FOB Danger being so effectively used to combat the insurgency. That guy holding the unit colors and wearing two stars on his helmet? That is General Batiste.

[couldn’t get photos to post; try following the link to the article]

FOB Dagger, also in Tikrit, had “two big-screen televisions with surround sound, six smaller televisions connected to Play Stations, board games, kitchen, fussball, books, and magazines.”

At LSA Anaconda, also known as Balad Air Base, Burger King and Pizza Hut opened on October 10, 2004. Those were in addition to the Subway and Baskin Robbins restaurants already at LSA Anaconda.

As of September 2004, FOB McKenzie, just outside of Samarra, had “a movie theater, performance stage, library, and Internet and phone room, among other amenities.”
For a man who was so concerned about inadequate troop strength, there was an awful lot of rest, recreation, relaxation, and other non-essential functions being performed by 1st Infantry Division Soldiers throughout 2004. The failure here was not Secretary Rumsfeld overtasking or undermanning the 1st Infantry Division. The failure was in General Batiste’s ineffective and inefficient use of the thousands of Soldiers under his command.

I think that the emotional weight of 150 Soldiers killed and the frustrating mission that General Batiste was tasked with has proven too much for the General to cope. I think that he is experiencing a cognitive dissonance where reality does not jibe with his self esteem and he has convinced himself that someone else is to blame for his unit not experiencing the wild success that he was accustomed to experiencing when in command positions throughout his otherwise stellar career.

To be fair, General Batiste is holding himself to an unreasonably high standard. He had a difficult mission in Iraq and he did a better job than he gives himself credit for. That is probably why he was on track to become a Deputy Corp Commander and would likely have found himself in command of over 100,000 troops in Iraq had he opted to remain in the Army. But General Batiste clearly holds himself to a higher standard and has become unnerved as a result of not meeting his high personal standards. Unfortunately, he has convinced himself that he and his men were the victims of an arrogant and negligent Defense Secretary who forced the military to spread itself too thin in Iraq. On this issue, all evidence points to failure to effectively use the troops available, rather than being shorted manpower.

I cannot stress enough that I do not doubt the sincerity of General Batiste. I think that he believes every word that he says. This is the case because he has convinced himself of something that is not true.

“The failure here was not Secretary Rumsfeld overtasking or undermanning the 1st Infantry Division. The failure was in General Batiste’s ineffective and inefficient use of the thousands of Soldiers under his command.”

Originally saw this in a comment in another thread but thought that it merited a thread of its own. I did two trips to OIF and agree with every word of this. Of all the negative press that our military gets, why does the sensationalized stuff garner headlines rather than legitimate critiques like this? This criticism is actually somewhat constructive.

1 posted on 05/29/2006 9:24:38 PM PDT by Axhandle

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.