Politics Toppled Pace From Joint Chiefs

Defense Secretary Gates Recommends Adm. Mike Mullen To Lead U.S. Armed Forces

(CBS/AP)  Bitter divisions over the Iraq war, particularly on Capitol Hill, led the Bush administration to change course and replace Gen. Peter Pace as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a grim Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday.

Gates said that despite earlier plans to recommend Pace for a second two-year term as chairman, he instead was recommending Adm. Mike Mullen, currently chief of naval operations, to take over when Pace's term expires Sept. 30.

"I think that the events of the last several months have simply created an environment in which I think there would be a confirmation process that would not be in the best interests of the country," Gates said. "I wish it were not necessary to make a decision like this. But I think it's a realistic appraisal of where we are."

Pace is the latest casualty of the Iraq War, but he was brought down by Washington politics CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports.

Gates said he had been told by Republican and Democratic senators that a confirmation hearing for Pace would be a "backward-looking and very contentious process."

The decision had been in the works for more than a couple of weeks, CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reports.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., acknowledged such advice, saying he had gathered views from a broad range of senators. "I found that the views of many senators reflected my own," and confirmation would have focused on the past four years of war, he said.

It was Levin, the head of the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee who contacted the defense secretary and told him Pace’s re-appointment would be ugly, CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports.

But on the other side of the aisle, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., also had reservations. He told Attkisson that it became obvious that Pace’s confirmation would have been used to “retry every mistake of the war at a time when we need to look forward, not backward.”

A spokesman for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., said she, too, believed it would have been a difficult re-nomination.

"When it comes to Iraq it's not enough for President Bush to change the cast, he must also change their script," said the spokesman, Philippe Reines.

Mullen has long been eyed for a promotion, and on Friday Gates praised him as having the "vision, strategic insight and integrity to lead America's armed forces."

The announcement still seemed to surprise some senior Pentagon officials who as recently as last week were convinced there would be a second term for Pace, the first Marine to serve as chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Pace will now retire when his term is up at the end of September.

Pace's departure will put nearly an entirely new slate of leaders and military commanders in charge of the war, which is now in its fifth year and has claimed the lives of more than 3,500 U.S. troops.

And, as Martin reports, ever since Gates replaced Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense last year, every single one of the top commanders running the war has been replaced.

Since then, the Democrats have shown an eagerness to challenge President Bush's handling of the conflict and support among Republicans has waned as well.

Democrats have used recent military confirmation hearings, including one earlier this week, to blast the administration's handling of the war.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid added that senators, "will be looking very closely at Admiral Mullen and General Cartwright's views to make sure they are committed to changing course in Iraq. Both men must be advocates for our troops, not for a failed policy."

White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said Gates "informed the president a little over two weeks ago that consultations had not gone well (with senators) and it was his recommendation that we not go forward with the renomination of General Pace."

Gates called National Security Council Adviser Steve Hadley in Heiligendamm, Germany, Thursday night, to talk about the timing of the announcement, and on Friday Hadley informed President Bush that they were going forward. "The president had already concurred" based on the earlier talks with Gates, said Johndroe, who was traveling overseas with President Bush.

[opfor311]

brianbwb,

The answer to hypothetical questions such as yours is that I would perform my duty under the UMCJ, and take the consequences of my actions. This is what I'd also expect of any serving member of the military.

But as for your premise that the Commander in Chief is blatenly violating the laws he swore to protect, I have seen no proof, and it is the duty of Congress to bring articles of impeachment if they have proof. Since the Speaker has said that impeachment is off the table, I'd have to say that it is merely your opinion then, and you are entitled to it.

Remember Winston Churchill's words:
'To be conservative at 20 is heartless and to be a liberal at 60 is plain idiocy.'

[macusweil]

"Looking at whats going on right now and who's doing what.... the Joint Chief needs to be an Army Man."

Or not .. so far the Army has screwed the pooch in Iraq.

We have just a bunch of yes-men running the Army because the Bush administration could not stand up to real leadership, so they are all weeded out. Just like at the justice dept. only the bigest a** kissers are left.

What you expected the best man for the job!? LOL

[Keypinitreel1]

The Best guy to take his place is more than likely an Army General rather than a Navy Admiral...

Common sense speaking....

Looking at whats going on right now and who's doing what.... the Joint Chief needs to be an Army Man.

[brianbwb-2009]

In fact, Opfor311, this is exactly my concern, what happens when a future C-I-C (or even this one) decides to finally deal with the "race problem" in America by creating false evidence of a threat, then ordering the military to take action? Should a soldier, being sworn to defend the US, actually attack US citizens on orders from the C-I-C, based on false evidence of threat?

This is the precedent being established now by this C-I-C, and if no one opposes it and holds him personally responsible, the story above may come true a lot sooner than you think.

[zootallures2]

He can get a job playing Frank Burns if they bring MASH back. But then so could most of the men in America. Maybe you'll get Hotlips Hilery to star with...LOL

[brianbwb-2009]

to Opfor311,

You write, "He will attempt to do all that he can to see to the welfare of his troops, but he will do so with a eye to the larger picture."
I understand your respect, and would like to share it, but in these days when the C-I-C is blatantly violating the very laws he was sworn to uphold, following his orders becomes a problem.

Allow me to pose a theoretical question, If your C-I-C told you to kill your own family, because he had info that they were a threat, but you know the info to be false, would you, as a soldier, obey that order?...

[antoniof123]

"I think that the events of the last several months have simply created an environment in which I think there would be a confirmation process that would not be in the best interests of the country," Gates said. "I wish it were not necessary to make a decision like this. But I think it's a realistic appraisal of where we are."

Ya think......

[king77shaw]

isn't he dating Ted Haggard ? maybe that's what did him in.

[petesis]

The military has become such an arm of the government that it is becoming just as messed up as the rest of the government. They wear uniforms and salute but they are a huge bureaucracy nonetheless and they reward a$$ki$$ing even more than alot of other branches. As a result... this is what we have. This guy was more a politician than a strategic thinker and finally the tide has turned against him. But it is far too late. And if it were not him they would have got some other yes man.

[ajmarine1]

edegenhart,

I meant service.