Obama Gets High Marks for Handling McChrystal Mess

WASHINGTON (June 23) -- The deed is done.

President Barack Obama today sacked Gen. Stanley McChrystal as top commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and replaced him with his boss, Gen. David Petraeus. McChrystal's scathing comments in a Rolling Stone article undermined civilian control of the military, Obama said, and did "not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general."

In a signal that his top concern lay with the outcome in Afghanistan and not with a single officer, the president stated, "War is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general or president. And as difficult as it is to lose General McChrystal, I believe it is the right decision for national security."

Whether it is the right political decision for Obama, sometimes accused of ambivalence over Afghanistan, will become clearer in the coming days. But political observers say that whatever the president did about his wayward general would have left him open to sniping from political opponents.

"At first I figured that if Obama fired McChrystal, he'd be called thin-skinned, and if he didn't he'd be called weak," said Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist. "That argued for firing -- far better to be called thin-skinned than weak."

By choosing a proven commodity in Petraeus, who wrote the blueprint for counterinsurgency in Iraq and is a darling of Republicans, the president limited the damage of the McChrystal affair, Sabato told AOL News.

"Obama was generous in his remarks toward McChrystal. The decision didn't sound petty. Then he put the focus on the far more important issue of whether the U.S. and allies are going to succeed in Afghanistan," he said. "I'll bet this fades quickly as an issue, if it even becomes an issue."

During today's appearance in the White House Rose Garden, the president and Petraeus were joined by Vice President Joe Biden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a show of military solidarity. The televised tableau was "a demonstration of [Obama's] confidence in his own powers, of his decisive ability to listen and judge before he acts and to clear the air of any sense that he acted from personal offense," said Thomas Benson, an expert on presidential rhetoric at Penn State University. "This was not, as the president articulated it, an act of anger but a firm recognition of the duties of the commander in chief and optimism in the power of the United States to move on."

Obama clearly was moving on even before the midday announcement. On Tuesday, he said McChrystal had used "poor judgment," and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs did not demur when asked about National Security Adviser James Jones being called a "clown" and the vice president's name being transformed into "Bite Me" by McChrystal aides quoted in the article.

As McChrystal made his way to the White House, aides leaked that Obama had already asked for a list of replacements. Once the general arrived this morning, he was given all of 20 minutes with the president. In perp-walk fashion, he climbed into an SUV to leave the White House and didn't return soon after as the president convened a meeting with his key national security advisers on Afghanistan.

And if that wasn't enough evidence that Obama had swiftly made up his mind, CNN's Barbara Starr reported that McChrystal was unlikely to return to Afghanistan and that his personal belongings, in laid-off worker style, would be boxed up in Kabul and shipped home to him.

"It was wise to make the decisions quickly to prevent what is so far a two-day story from becoming even more disruptive and divisive," said Bill Harlow, a former CIA spokesman who does media coaching and was among many who concluded Obama had no other choice after McChrystal's "improvised explosive remarks. "Such indiscretion would be a firing offense at any time -- but especially so with the administration being under fire for a slow and weak response on other important matters -- like the Gulf oil spill."

Just as Obama sought to rebound from criticism that he was too soft on BP after its drilling rig exploded, the president needed to counter the perception that he has been "less than fully competent" on Afghanistan, Republican strategist Tony Blankley told AOL News. He noted that President George W. Bush's "seeming ineffectiveness at Katrina undercut all his other policies."

But Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center, said he has been struck by "how many things have happened around Obama and yet so little has changed in the way he's perceived" in polls. He said surveys show the president's approval ratings stuck in the high 40s despite the BP oil disaster. The deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, where recent developments haven't favored his stated goal to begin drawing down troop levels in July 2011, also "hasn't moved the needle."

If the reaction of the president's foes is any indication, this latest imbroglio may not hurt Obama's standing either.

Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut -- all frequent critics of the administration's conduct of the war -- unanimously backed McChrystal's removal. Although McCain reiterated their opposition to a timetable for troop withdrawals, he said they were "confident that General Petraeus' leadership will have a very positive effect on the situation in the region."

House Minority Leader John Boehner, a vocal Republican flamethrower on health care reform and the economy, issued what for him was a tepid statement. "I have great respect for General McChrystal and the job he's done in Afghanistan and elsewhere in service of our country, but I respect the decision of our commander in chief," he said, adding that Petraeus "is the right person take over this command."

Greg Crist, a Republican consultant who was a spokesman for former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, gushed in an e-mail that "placing Petraeus back in the mix was Solomon-esque, I have to admit. Petraeus is a known quantity, and respected. The move looked presidential."

Blankley, who worked for former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, e-mailed that the president had given a "crisp delivery, appropriately respectful to McChrystal's record. Good performance. Obama's problem has always been management, more than rhetoric."

John Pitney, a former House Republican aide who now teaches at Claremont McKenna College in California, said Obama made the best of a bad situation. "His decision was totally justified, given that the general so clearly violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. His statement was clear and dignified," Pitney said. "When he's serious, the president frequently displays a scowl. This time, it was justified. He had jolly good reason to scowl."

The political scientist said Obama walked "a fine line between magnanimity and weakness" and had he kept McChrystal he would have risked looking wimpy instead of gracious. Having decided to cashier the general, he could have looked petty since, "unlike the Truman-MacArthur confrontation, his episode is not about grand policy differences but snarky comments in a magazine." Yet Obama avoided that, too.

"He came up in much better political shape than I had anticipated. His action was more hard-edged," said presidential scholar Fred Greenstein. "He really cut surgically into the situation. ... He gets something in the 'A' range."