Clark calls for Rumsfeld to go
I've fallen behind in updating this blog, but had to get this one up. Courtesy of Melange at the Clark Community Network, Clark endorses the "Generals' Revolt" and joins the call for Rumsfeld to resign.
Update: Media now available: Audio,video (QuickTime).
Jamie Colby: Six retired generals now calling for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to resign. They claim he mismanaged the war in Iraq but do other retired generals agree? Well, joining us on the phone from Little Rock, Arkansas, retired NATO commander and Fox News analyst, General Wesley Clark. General, good afternoon.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Good afternoon.
Jamie Colby: Thanks for being with us. Let me ask you first, is it appropriate for a former general to comment on the Defense Secretary's performance when we're at war?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Of course it's appropriate. In fact, it's more than appropriate. It's their responsibility to provide the access to the American public to military information and ideas. Not disclose classified information but to give their honest opinion. If called on or to volunteer it - that's a democracy and they have some specialized information and it's a good thing that they share it.
Jamie Colby: Well as a former general as well, what is your take on Secretary Rumsfeld's leadership?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, I ran for president in 2004 because I felt that the administration's entire direction of policy with regard to the war on terror was a mistake. We should have fought in Afghanistan and finished off Osama bin Laden. The war in Iraq was unnecessary. Secretary Rumsfeld was the officer in charge as the Secretary of Defense. He's the number 2 in the chain of command to the president and I believe Secretary Rumsfeld hasn't done an adequate job. He should go.
Jamie Colby: When you look at the position of number 2, can you put into perspective the need to follow the orders of the commander in chief versus the ability to present a different strategy?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well certainly. I mean, I ran to be president of the United States because I thought the commander in chief should be replaced. Ultimately he's the person responsible. The American people didn't understand how bad the situation was in the election of 2004. Now these generals are taking it upon themselves to speak out on behalf of people who are still in the army. They're relating their experiences and they feel like they haven't...that people in uniform were not listened to. That we didn't go in with enough troops; we didn't have the right approach for the inter-agency; we don't have a policy process to reinforce the military efforts with diplomatic efforts in the regions. All of these things ultimately come back to the president but his right hand man is Don Rumsfeld.
Jamie Colby: Would you, if you would General, listen to what Secretary Rumsfeld has to say? I have some sound that I want to play.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Sure.
---
Later in the day, Clark addresses the issue again: Audio, Video (QuickTime)
John Kasich: Earlier Heartland asked General Wesley Clark why these 6 generals are doing this now and not when they were in power.
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: These aren't generals who were at the top of the policy chain. They weren't the ones directly advising Rumsfeld and what was happening is Rumsfeld, Secretary Rumsfeld, came in with his preconceptions, with his ideas, he knew what he wanted generally, he worked the plan until they got what he wanted. I'm sure these generals in one way or another did stand up. Now, in retirement they're perfectly entitled to come out and give their opinion.
John Kasich: General Clark, is this just payback because Secretary Rumsfeld has asserted civilian control of the military and has pushed major reforms there and at the Pentagon?
GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: John, every Secretary of Defense exerts civilian control of the Pentagon. Certainly when I was in the Pentagon with Secretary of Defense Bill Perry and Secretary Bill Cohen, they were both very strong leaders who absolutely insisted on civilian control over the military. Every Secretary of Defense has, so there's nothing new about that. And that's not really the root of the issue.
The root of the issue here is that there is a military competence that has to be brought to bear on a problem. The people who are in the field, they can tell you kind of what's required, how long it will take, what it looks like based on some assumptions about the intelligence. Now, under enough pressure from the Secretary of Defense's office, some of these judgments may be challenged and maybe they're wrong and maybe some other military leaders will fold under that pressure. We don't know - that's the internal process of decision-making. But I don't think it's possible to say that this was simply a function of Secretary Rumsfeld exerting civilian control.
What the Secretary of Defense has to do is achieve the right balance between the civilian control that is mandatory in the United States system and listening to the advice of the military professionals who've been there. Many of them have done these kinds of things before and they know what's required. In this case that process got out of whack and that's what the generals are protesting.
