In light of the decision last week by Gen. David Petraeus to choose Hugh Hewitt, of all people, to interview him, and in light of the post I wrote concerning Gen. Petraeus' three-year history of dubious and seemingly partisan claims about the Iraq War, I submitted an interview request to Centcom, in Iraq, with the hope of asking the General about these matters. The following e-mail exchange ensued with Col. Steven A. Boylan, the Public Affairs Officer to Gen. Petraeus[.]Glenn's letter to Boylan:
I am a Contributing Writer at Salon Magazine and a contributor to the nationally syndicated Alan Colmes Show on radio.Boylan's reply:
I am writing to request an interview with General David Petraeus, to be broadcast in its entirety on the Alan Colmes Show, along with a full, unedited transcript to be published as the feature story on Salon.
There was some controversy triggered when Gen. Petraeus this week gave an exclusive interview to highly partisan, pro-war Republican talk show host and blogger Hugh Hewitt. Concerns were expressed that Gen. Petraeus was submitting to interviews only with those who have a reputation for conducting highly reverent and uncritical interviews with Bush officials and military commanders.
[...]
As I am much more of a war skeptic than Hewitt, both the questions I would pose and the audience which would be exposed to the interview would be different than the one Gen. Petraeus conducted with Hewitt. It is my sincere hope that Gen. Petraeus, in order to facilitate as honest and robust a public discussion as possible, is willing to discuss the situation in Iraq and the merits of the current strategy with both supporters and critics of the initiative.
[...]
Dear Mr. Greenwald,Read the rest of Glenn's post for his -- as always -- sharp and perceptive insights on the implications of this epistolary exchange.
Thank you for your note and request to interview Gen Petraeus. I am more than happy to add you to the very long list of requests that we have and continue to work through.
I have read the couple of posts concerning the interview that your reference, but I would have to say I disagree with the assertions that have been submitted as well respectfully disagree with your assertions in this case that it was an exclusive interview with the station. Should any real research be conducted, it would quickly reveal that Gen Petraeus has and continues to conduct interviews across the spectrum of media to include all five networks, all main stream newspapers and radio as well. I venture to say that the TV networks to include CBS Radio, AP Radio, PBS, NPR, IraqSlogger, a host of others, the BBC and of course Newsweek and Time Magazine's Joe Klein is if anything, not a supporter of the current administration.
Gen Petraeus has conducted well over 100 interviews/media engagements since his initial press conference in March and so far, this is the first time that anyone has accused his engagement with the media to be anything but forthright and open. I think if you review the transcript, Gen Petraeus answered the questions in a very open and honest manner describing the progress as well as the challenges that face us here in Iraq.
Again, thank you for your request and I have added it to the very long list of requests that we are making our way through.
All the best,
Steve
Steven A. Boylan
Colonel, US Army Public Affairs Officer to the Commanding General Multi-National Force - Iraq
On one of Glenn's points, though -- the one about Gen. Petraeus's glowing public statements on the surge reflecting an unquestioning partisan adherence to the Bush administration's political stance -- I share Big Tent Democrat's feeling that party politics is not what's motivating Petraeus:
One quibble I do have with Glenn is his attributing to Petraeus a political adherence to President Bush's political goals. I think Petraeus' motivation is different. He is a proud soldier who wants to succeed in Iraq. He has pride of authorship in the Surge. And his personal reputation is now inexorably wrapped up in its success. I believe Petraeus' motivations are that of a soldier determined to do his duty as well as a human being who wants to protecthis reputation. Neither of these are bad in and of themselves.
What is bad is when people like Joe Klein ignore these obvious motivations and uncritically swallow the assertions of a General Petraeus. The basic skepticism that should be applied to anyone making self interested statements is thrown aside when dealing with generals. It is the fundamental problem of waiting to September - because we can all see the stories now - "Petraeus Sees Success In 2008 (or as the NYTimes reports today, in 2009)." and we are all expected to swallow it.
