[A-List] US state: internal struggle over Iraq

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

Rows dog general waiting to take over

Bush's man to pick up pieces after war

Matthew Engel in Washington
Wednesday April 2, 2003
The Guardian

It is probably most accurate to call him Iraq's president-elect. The moment
Saddam Hussein falls, Jay Garner will take over, with the kind of sweeping
power over the whole of Iraq that even President Saddam has been unable to
exercise for the past few years.

When the name Garner was announced as the US's intended interim ruler six
weeks ago, it seemed relatively uncontroversial. After all, it was clear
someone would have to do the job. Here was a retired general, highly
regarded in the services and with a track record of involvement in
humanitarian work in the region, being dragged reluctantly from rebuilding
the boat deck at his Florida home the moment his country called.

But as the weeks have gone by, the choice looks to be yet another
misjudgment from a Pentagon leadership that has misjudged rather a lot.

At present, General Garner is sitting in Kuwait, saying nothing in public,
waiting for the US military to declare at least some areas sufficiently
pacific for his team to start work. For the past fortnight the Iraqi interim
authority has had the formal sanction of the Bush administration. But its
plans remain mysterious: the New York Times called Gen Garner's operation
"obsessively secret".

Meanwhile, arguments swirl around him - between those ancient Washington
adversaries, the state and defence departments, and between the US and the
UN. There is no argument among Arab opinion formers, who with rare unanimity
have been condemning his appointment as another sign of American contempt
for Iraqi feelings.

Among those who actually know him, no one seems to have a bad word for Jay
Gar ner. Now 64, he retired six years ago as a three-star general, having
made his reputation most spectacularly after the 1991 Gulf war when he was
in charge of the Kurdish areas in the north, and won the confidence of the
thousands of Kurds who had fled into the mountains to escape President
Saddam's forces.

Former colleagues recall him as a brave decision-maker ("He wouldn't dodge
bullets, he'd bite them," in the words of General Thomas McInerney) and a
humane, informal ("Call me Jay") and humorous man. His Florida neighbours
like him too. "Real casual, very humble," said one of them, Renee Keene.

But three facts have come to haunt his mission before it even starts. One is
the general's work since retiring from the army as president of defence
contractor SY Coleman, now part of a communications-led outfit called L3. An
L3 spokesman insisted that Gen Garner's firm does not make military hardware
but specialises in the guidance systems. In other words, he is the man who
has been trying to make sure the weapons hit the targets rather than the
surrounding civilians. This may be true, but this might require an
over-subtle explanation in the Baghdad souks if Iraqis start to believe they
are being ruled by a man who was just trying to kill them.

The second problem concerns his links with Israel. In October 2000 Gen
Garner went on what seems to have been a routine 10-day freebie to Israel,
organised by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, an
organisation striving "to inform the American defence and foreign affairs
community about the important role Israel can and does play in bolstering
democratic interests in the Mediterranean and the Middle East". Afterwards,
the general signed a declaration of support for Israeli policy, at a time
when the latest outbreak of Palestinian unrest was just under way.

Commentators across the Arab world, always on the lookout for slights, are
aghast at the insensitivity involved in his appointment. "It sends
completely the wrong signal," said Ibrahim Hooper of the Washington-based
Council on American-Islamic Relations.

"From the perspective of the Muslim and Arab world, it is inappropriate to
have someone who has exhibited strong pro-Israel sentiments as the veritable
ruler of Iraq. It will be seen as confirming the sense that it is not a war
of lib eration but a war to promote the state of Israel."

In Washington a diplomatic battle has broken out about whether relief for
Iraq should be controlled by Colin Powell's state department or the
Pentagon. Mr Powell's allies regard Gen Garner, appointed by the defence
secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and reporting to the wartime commander Tommy
Franks, as someone whose motives will inevitably be regarded as tainted in
postwar Iraq.

It now seems incredible that any American could easily win the confidence of
the Iraqis and win a reputation as a wise and generous ruler. UN officials
had a "not overwhelmingly satisfactory" meeting with Gen Garner before he
left for Kuwait.

"A lot of us are quite astonished," one UN source said. "We would have
thought the US would have wanted to spread the responsibility around. His
appointment seems to be part of the early thinking that they were going to
be garlanded with rose petals."