Stanely McChrystal

Is David Petraeus Leaking to Undercut the President? Or Is Someone Framing Him?

The WaPo has the latest in seemingly yearly series of leaks of Top Secret cables designed to undercut the President’s plan to withdraw from Afghanistan.

The U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan sent a top-secret cable to Washington last month warning that the persistence of enemy havens in Pakistan was placing the success of the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan in jeopardy, U.S. officials said.

The cable, written by Ryan C. Crocker, amounted to an admission that years of U.S. efforts to curtail insurgent activity in Pakistan by the lethal Haqqani network, a key Taliban ally, were failing.

The hints and feints the article offers about who leaked the memo provide ample entertainment for a Saturday afternoon.

Note the way the WaPo describes its sources inconsistently. It offers this quote from a senior defense official.

“The sanctuaries are a deal-killer for the [Afghan war] strategy,” said a senior defense official who is familiar with the ongoing debate and who, like several officials in this story, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations. [my emphasis]

But then the WaPo suggests military leaders have motive to leak the cable, distinguishing between “defense” and “military” officials.

The cable, which was described by several officials familiar with its contents, could be used as ammunition by senior military officials who favor more aggressive action by the United States against the Haqqani havens in Pakistan. It also could buttress calls from senior military officials for a more gradual withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan as the 2014 deadline for ending combat operations approaches.

These military officials have maintained for months that the strategy of targeting raids against Taliban leadership and building local Afghan governance is showing impressive results. [my emphasis]

Mind you, none of these military officials seem to be directly quoted here–at least not defined as military officials. The comment might just reflect the knowledge of Greg Jaffe, WaPo’s military writer. Though it would be consistent if a General or two leaked such a cable–after all, Stanley McChrystal is assumed to have leaked a similar cable during Obama’s Afghanistan review in 2009, for similar reason.

Yet I’m most interested in this quote, of someone whose affiliation was rather pointedly (given the description of defense and military sources) not identified.

“There’s no debate about the importance of going after Haqqani . . . and Taliban militants who launch attacks into Afghanistan,” one U.S. official said. “Support for this is universal.” [my emphasis]

The article also defaults to “US officials” elsewhere, though that could be because the sources came from multiple agencies. Note, “US official” can be used to refer to members of Congress, as well as agency officials.

In any case should we assume these unmarked sources are intelligence ones–the beat of Greg Miller, the WaPo’s intelligence writer and the other byline on the story?

Continue reading

Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz @gideonstrumpet Include everything!
35sreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @adambonin Pretty much Philly is the obvious answer and if you guys blow it you suck.
54sreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @McBlondeLand That would be about the first thing Sunny Hostin has ever said that is credible.
1mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @armandodkos Yeah, but this one was cravenly designed to be a trial with an acquittal as the result.
1mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @csoghoian @normative @Robyn_Greene @emptywheel @Krhawkins5 Your definition of "fluff" is much narrower than their definition of "relevance"
3mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @normative @Robyn_Greene @emptywheel @Krhawkins5 A Stanford Tree silly.
4mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @RKTlaw @gideonstrumpet ...all chip in and get them a gift. Or a steak and beer. Or something.
5mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @RKTlaw @gideonstrumpet Ooof, no kidding. After the way it has been handled, if this GJ overrides McCulloch's shit and indicts, we should...
5mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @gideonstrumpet No. Of course not. It was specifically designed to no-bill.
6mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @normative I thought you had interns?
6mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel One positive thing I will say abt I Con the Records' AMA: it is less disastrous than JPMorgan Chase's attempt. http://t.co/pUp32dxtP4
6mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @normative Yet more evidence someone is undercutting her. Also yet another exhibit in "ISIL dangerously better at propaganda than we are."
9mreplyretweetfavorite
November 2014
S M T W T F S
« Oct    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30