Pentagon backlash: Why are top military leaders attacking Obama鈥檚 foreign policy?
On Tuesday, Gen. Ray Odierno, the US Army Chief of Staff, publicly questioned President Obama鈥檚 plan to reduce the size of America鈥檚 ground-combat forces, joining a growing chorus of current and former administration officials speaking out against Obama鈥檚 foreign policy.
Speaking at a news conference during the annual meeting of the Association of the U.S. Army, Odierno cited new threats in the world that forestall the shrinking of the Army, as Obama has repeatedly called for.
聽鈥淭he world is changing in front of us. We have seen Russian aggression in Europe, we have seen ISIS, we have seen increased stability in other places,鈥� General Odierno told the gathered crowd. 鈥淪o I now have concern whether even going below 490,000 [troops] is the right thing to do or not, because of what I see potentially on the horizon.鈥�
The active-duty Army now has 510,000 members, which military leaders are working to reduce.聽The Army agreed to cut size of its force to 490,000 due to budget cuts approved in 2011. Further spending battles and cuts means the Army may have to shrink further, to 450,000 or 420,000 members, according to .
Is Odierno鈥檚 public criticism unusual?
In fact, not at all: Odierno is the latest official to speak out against Obama鈥檚 pledge to keep soldiers out of Iraq as the US works to fight ISIS.
Speaking with ,听蹿辞谤尘别谤 Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, 鈥渢here will be boots on the ground if there鈥檚 to be any hope of success in this strategy. And I think that by continuing to repeat that [the US won鈥檛 put boots on the ground], the president, in effect, traps himself.鈥�
聽鈥溾�ou just don鈥檛 take anything off the table up front, which it appears the administration has tried to do,鈥� Retired Gen. James Mattis,聽adding, 鈥淪pecifically, if this threat to our nation is determined to be as significant as I believe it is, we may not wish to reassure our enemies in advance that they will not see American 'boots on the ground.'鈥�
And as ,聽Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, told the Senate Armed Services Committee聽Tuesday聽that he may recommend to the president deploying combat forces in Iraq.
The growing chorus of officials questioning the president鈥檚 policy has some wondering about a 鈥�.鈥�
And it turns out it鈥檚 not just the Pentagon. A growing number of former top cabinet officials have recently publicly criticized the president鈥檚 foreign policy, creating an opportunity for Republicans in the 2014 midterm elections, and potentially creating a credibility crisis for the White House.
A week ago, former聽CIA director and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta published a book, 鈥�Worthy Fights,鈥澛爄n which he said Obama 鈥渓ost his way鈥� on foreign policy, including the president鈥檚 failure to enforce a 鈥渞ed line鈥� on chemical weapon use in Syria, rejecting advice to arm Syrian rebels, and approving a full withdrawal of troops from Iraq in 2011, thereby creating a power vacuum that led to the rise of ISIS.
Prior to Panetta鈥檚 criticism, former Defense Secretary Gates also criticized Obama鈥檚 handling of Afghanistan in his memoir, 鈥�.鈥� 聽Regarding the Afghanistan war, the president was 鈥渟keptical if not outright convinced it would fail,鈥� Gates writes in his book.
And former Secretary of State for rejecting advice on arming Syrian rebels,聽saying that decision ultimately allowed ISIS to flourish.
Is it OK to openly criticize a sitting president?
Some, like the Washington Post鈥檚 Dana Milbank, , writing 鈥渢his level of disloyalty is stunning.鈥�
But the Post鈥檚 Ed Rogers has .聽None of these individuals are amateurs, lightweights, or greedy for attention, he writes.聽鈥淭hey are all distinguished leaders who don鈥檛 shoot from the hip or have anything to prove. So when they agree on something, whatever they are telling us should be treated seriously. The world should take notice.鈥�
