FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Celebrity General

by MICHAEL BRENNER

There is one celebrity with the makings of a national hero, someone who has the qualities that might carry him right into the White House.  It is David Petraeus.  He is almost universally credited with the brilliant achievement of saving American honor and gaining an approximation of ‘victory’ in Iraq.  President Obama himself is in awe of this warrior intellectual to whom he defers on all matters in the Greater Middle East.  Petraeus’ mythic standing is a perfect example of how the compelling demand for a hero creates the illusion that indeed a savior has arrived.  The so-called ‘surge’ for which Petraeus takes unabashed credit did not change anything fundamental in Iraq.  The record is clear that the decline in violence, sectarian and anti-American, was due to three factors independent of our actions.  They were: the emergence among the Sunni militants of the sawamovementthat turned on al-Qaeda in Iraq for their own tribal and cultural reasons; the Sunnis defeat by the Shi’ites in the civil war of 2005-2007; Iranian political intervention to persuade Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army to stand down so as to strengthen Prime Minister Maliki’s hand in the Iraqi-U.S. negotiations on a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA).  Iran won its bet as Maliki indeed did turn the tables on Petraeus et al in Washington, severely restricting the American military’s presence in Iraq.  All this was in the works well before the surge troops arrived, troops that never got beyond Baghdad.  Moreover, Iraq today is an economic and political shambles, without a government for nine months, that teeters on the brink of a three-way civil war while Tehran’s influence mounts steadily.

Petraeus, the most political general America has seen since MacArthur, eagerly accepted the unearned laurels.  He plays Presidents and public opinion with the deftness he describes in his counter insurgency writings as required to win the propaganda campaign against the native rebels.  The doctrine has been far more effectively executed in Washington than in Afghanistan.  In Fall 2004, he penned a series of articles lauding George Bush for his brilliant and bold leadership.  In them, he proclaimed success in personally building an Iraqi army ready to take over responsibility for the country’s security.  That was a complete fiction.  In fact, Petraeus had made a series of blunders in recruiting a nearly 100% Shi’ite army composed mainly of party militia members.  One of the very few capable units, the notorious Grey Wolves, took the lead in the bloody ethnic cleansing of Sunnis from Baghdad and surrounding districts.  6 years later, the Iraqi National Army of which their American general boasted is still a work in progress.

None of this is of interest to our leaders, to our media, to our public.  Hero worship is blind – especially when there is a desperate emotional need to make the country feel good – or, at least, less bad – about its tragic, farcical intervention that tarnished every principle our Republic supposedly holds dear.

Petraeus understands all this.  He plays his role skillfully.  A shy half-smile for a people that prefers the boy next door variety of hero to the grim hard-edged military man we associate with the bad guys.  A chest full of ribbons and medals that, to a few jaundiced eyes, makes him look like a caricatured Ruritanian Field Marshal.  Army regulations on decorations say wear only 3 or wear them all.  It is highly doubtful that Petraeus ever considered the former option.  Modesty is not ‘in’ when it comes to American celebrity culture.  Oddly, none of Petraeus’ decorations are for actions in combat.  He never has seen combat; he never has been under fire.  The very model of a modern hero-general.  His big battles were won in the corridors of the Pentagon and the antechambers to presidential power.  However confected Petraeus’ legendary triumphs are, they serve no less well as credentials that a sorely tried nation may take as signaling that here is the man who can set the country straight.

Audacity is the key to turning celebrity into hero status.  Sarah Palin has it.  So too does David Petraeus – in abundance.  It took audacious nerve to throw himself into the 2004 presidential election while a serving officer, and do so by misrepresenting a key element in the Iraq debate – one for which he was individually responsible.  It took audacity to maneuver to undercut two of his former commanding officers, General David McKiernan and Admiral William Fallon, whose careers met an untimely demise as a consequence.  It took audacity to sideline Ambassador General Karl Eikenberry from last year’s critical Afghanistan strategic review (with the backing of Robert Gates) because his views ran against the grain of Petraeus’ own plans for being producer and director of SURGE II.  It took audacity to qualify in public the White House’s publicly stated commitment to begin a withdrawal of troops by July 1 2011 within days of its being made.  It has taken even greater audacity to plant stories via his aides that he has the necessary ‘moral authority’ in effect to reset the mission’s coordinates and resource needs as he deems fit.  “Team Kabul,” as Petraeus refers to his Afghanistan staff, says openly that the July 2011 date is “meaningless.”  It takes audacity to launch a campaign of village destruction in Kandahar province, cleansing the countryside of its civilian population, so as to chalk up a larger tally of enemy kills in time for the year end review – even if this means turning on its head the core precept of his own counterinsurgency doctrine.  It takes audacity to spread word of a breakthrough success in the bringing of “a very high level Taliban leader,” Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansour, to Kabul for “promising” talks (literally as well as figuratively bringing him); and then when the ‘Taliban no. 2’ is exposed as an imposter, a Quetta shop keeper in fact, for Petraeus brazenly to offer the laconic comment that “I was not surprised.”  And, to cap it all, to blame the British for the entire episode.  That is the kind of audacity that points a general in the direction of the White House whose incumbent is your Commander-in-Chief.

By the way, the Editors of the New York Times have offered no comment on the ‘Taliban leader’ episode – a humiliation for Petraeus, a humiliation for America.  Americans may pay it little attention; others in Kabul, Islamabad and Teheran do.

Michael Brenner is a Professor of International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh.


Michael Brenner is a Professor of International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh.

More articles by:
June 27, 2016
Robin Hahnel
Brexit: Establishment Freak Out
James Bradley
Omar’s Motive
Gregory Wilpert – Michael Hudson
How Western Military Interventions Shaped the Brexit Vote
Leonard Peltier
41 Years Since Jumping Bull, 500 Years of Trauma
Rev. William Alberts
Orlando: the Latest Victim of Radicalizing American Imperialism
Patrick Cockburn
Brexiteers Have Much in Common With Arab Spring Protesters
Franklin Lamb
How 100 Syrians, 200 Russians and 11 Dogs Out-Witted ISIS and Saved Palmyra
John Grant
Omar Mateen: The Answers are All Around Us
Dean Baker
In the Wake of Brexit Will the EU Finally Turn Away From Austerity?
Ralph Nader
The IRS and the Self-Minimization of Congressman Jason Chaffetz
Gordon Smith
Goodbye UK, Goodbye Great Britain: What Next?
Martha Pskowski
Detained in Dilley: Deportation and Asylum in Texas
stclair
Headaches of Empire: Brexit’s Effect on the United States
Dave Lindorff
Honest Election System Needed to Defeat Ruling Elite
Louisa Willcox
Delisting Grizzly Bears to Save the Endangered Species Act?
Jason Holland
The Tragedy of Nothing
Jeffrey St. Clair
Revolution Reconsidered, Guest Starring Bernard Sanders in the Role of Robespierre
Weekend Edition
June 24, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
A Blow for Peace and Democracy: Why the British Said No to Europe
Pepe Escobar
Goodbye to All That: Why the UK Left the EU
Michael Hudson
Revolts of the Debtors: From Socrates to Ibn Khaldun
Andrew Levine
Summer Spectaculars: Prelude to a Tea Party?
Kshama Sawant
Beyond Bernie: Still Not With Her
Mike Whitney
¡Basta Ya, Brussels! British Voters Reject EU Corporate Slavestate
Tariq Ali
Panic in the House: Brexit as Revolt Against the Political Establishment
Paul Street
Miranda, Obama, and Hamilton: an Orwellian Ménage à Trois for the Neoliberal Age
Ellen Brown
The War on Weed is Winding Down, But Will Monsanto Emerge the Winner?
Gary Leupp
Why God Created the Two-Party System
Conn Hallinan
Brexit Vote: a Very British Affair (But Spain May Rock the Continent)
Ruth Fowler
England, My England
Jeffrey St. Clair
Lines Written on the Occasion of Bernie Sanders’ Announcement of His Intention to Vote for Hillary Clinton
Norman Pollack
Fissures in World Capitalism: the British Vote
Paul Bentley
Mercenary Logic: 12 Dead in Kabul
Binoy Kampmark
Parting Is Such Sweet Joy: Brexit Prevails!
Elliot Sperber
Show Me Your Papers: Supreme Court Legalizes Arbitrary Searches
Jan Oberg
The Brexit Shock: Now It’s All Up in the Air
Nauman Sadiq
Brexit: a Victory for Britain’s Working Class
Brian Cloughley
Murder by Drone: Killing Taxi Drivers in the Name of Freedom
Ramzy Baroud
How Israel Uses Water as a Weapon of War
Brad Evans – Henry Giroux
The Violence of Forgetting
Ben Debney
Homophobia and the Conservative Victim Complex
Margaret Kimberley
The Orlando Massacre and US Foreign Policy
David Rosen
Americans Work Too Long for Too Little
Murray Dobbin
Do We Really Want a War With Russia?
Kathy Kelly
What’s at Stake
Louis Yako
I Have Nothing “Newsworthy” to Report this Week
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail