What Happens In January

It seems that Rep. Ellen Tauscher actually thought up an original and potentially informative practical question to ask General Petraeus -- what's he going to do if in January 2009 his commander-in-chief says he wants to withdraw from Iraq and needs his theater commander to start drawing up plans and giving advice on logistics? Apparently, Petraeus wasn't content to say something straightforward about how he'd do his job:

"I would back up," he said, "and ask what's the mission, what's the desired endstate. And then you advise on resources..." Tauscher said the goal would be to keep the security gains of the surge, fix the readiness problems of the military and cut U.S. costs in Iraq.

"My response would be dialogue on what the risks would be. And, again, this is about risk." Petraeus sounded a lot like he was saying he would not be willing to advise a President Obama or a President Clinton on withdrawal -- something that, unless he was willing to resign, is very Constitutionally dubious.

He then backed up and said "I absolutely support the idea of civial control of the military" (good to hear!) but still didn't say either that he would offer the requested advice or that he'd resign in protest and let someone new come on board. This kind of thing -- resistance from inside the command structure to implementing a new president's electoral mandate to end the war -- is likely to be a substantial political landmine for the next administration. It's one of several reasons why I think it's absolutely vital to campaign on a clear and unambiguous determination to genuinely end the war (i.e., without this residual business) to ensure that there's no doubt in anyone's mind about where the country stands.

This article available online at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2008/04/what-happens-in-january/44275/