Time was when a military commander — during an increasingly controversial war — would not have been comfortable touring college campuses. Think Gen. William Westmoreland or maybe Gen. Curtis “Bombs Away” LeMay during the Vietnam era. Not pretty.
But that was then — and this is still the post-9/11 Middle East. And this is the unflappable, four-star Gen. David Petraeus, the man in charge at U.S. Central Command. Just in from a 36-hour road trip, where he had spoken at Brigham Young (Utah) University, Saint Anselm (NH) College and Yale (Conn). Petraeus arrived in time to give the keynote address at USF’s Symposium on Afghanistan and Pakistan last Friday. His smooth, informal delivery went over well with a respectful audience of more than 500 students and faculty at the Oval Theater in USF’s Marshall Student Center. He could have been discussing mass transit or global warming.
In a Petraeus bio-pic, Alan Alda comes to mind — not George C. Scott or John Wayne. The native New Yorker is a West Point grad with a patrician mien and a Ph.D. in international relations from Princeton. He was a runner-up for Time magazine’s “Person of the Year” in 2007. Foreign Policy magazine recently selected him as one of the world’s top 100 “public intellectuals.” He’s known to harbor political ambitions.
Petraeus, 57, has a sense of humor — evidenced by his “Johnny Depp Somali pirates” reference — as well as a sense of timing. He had an aide present a green-and-gold, CENTCOM t-shirt to USF President Judy Genshaft, who had introduced him.
Petraeus spoke in generalities: of progress, managed expectations and a “civil-military campaign plan,” but broke no new ground. He did, however, provide an early scoop of Ayad Allawi’s narrow victory over incumbent Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Iraq’s parliamentary elections. And, yes, the strong showing by the pro-American, secular Shiite was a positive portent for the U.S. But, no, no hint that the commander-in-chief was planning a post-health-care reform sortie to Afghanistan over the weekend.
Mostly, his Q&A and PowerPoint-complemented presentation was noteworthy for what didn’t happen during this tumultuous time in our society. No protest signs outside. No signs of protest inside. Even the requisite anti-Israeli question from a Muslim student was seamlessly defused as Petraeus bridged to a broader agenda.
And when he encountered a hypothetical question from Tehran-born USF Professor Mohsen Milani about any possible Iranian applications of nuclear-containment strategies that worked against the USSR, Petraeus donned his diplomat’s hat and responded with a good-natured non answer. To wit: “That’s not a hypothetical that I could hypothetically discuss.”
At a time when civil discourse seems increasingly unfashionable and “you lie” and “baby killer” epithets are no longer off limits on Capitol Hill, the Petraeus presentation on war was a model of decorum.
His last slide — depicting U.S. G.I.’s re-enlisting en masse in Baghdad — spoke volumes. “They’re not doing it for the stock options,” he deadpanned. “These are the people who turn big ideas — from people like me — into reality on the ground. There’s no greater honor than to command them.”
Some Petraeus outtakes:
* “Iraqracy“: That’s the upshot — including an encouraging level of “cross-sectarian and cross ethnic” collaboration — of the recent Iraqi election. The surprisingly impressive turnout for Allawi’s secular (Iraqiya) coalition made it that much more notable.
* “The most important surge (in Iraq) was ideas — not forces. Cooperation was not optional…You have to see it in schools, markets, neighborhoods.” The critical factor: the (U.S. forces’) “live with the people” plan.
*”Those of us who have been in this business don’t use terms like ‘optimist’ or ‘pessimist.’ We’re ‘realists.’ And the reality is that it is all hard, and it’s hard all the time. That is true of Afghanistan very, very much.”
* “A work in progress“: Afghanistan.
* “The key is Afghan governance — governance that can achieve legitimacy in the eyes of the people.”
* “They (Afghan government) have to connect the people to Kabul and to connect with the existing social structure.”
* “We’ve seen quite a significant (mindset) change there (Pakistan) — among politicians, clerics, the people. They know they have a threat emerging from the (ungoverned tribal area bordering Pakistan and Afghanistan) territories. They see it as an existential threat to their country.” Pakistan is looking for a “sustained commitment” from the U.S. “Counter-terrorism requires more than counter-terrorist forces” — meaning U.S. assistance that ranges from the “civilian, political and economic” to “education, rehab and the rule of law.”
* Iran: “Its nuclear program is the most serious concern.” The U.S. is now moving from the “open hand” and the “diplomatic track” to the “pressure track” (sanctions, U.N. Security Counsel involvement).