September 14, 2007 (LPAC) -- EIR News Service reported today that it has confirmed reports published in the Washington Post and Inter Press Service that there is a serious policy and personal rift between the two top American military commanders in the Central Command. The CENTCOM Commander, Adm. William Fallon, has been a strong critic of the Bush Administration's "surge" policy, according to EIR sources and a Sept. 13 story by Gareth Porter, which appeared on antiwar.com. According to Porter, Fallon has "derided" the U.S. ground commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, as "a sycophant" and worse.

Reportedly the rift first surfaced in February of 2007, when the Bush White House tasked Gen. Petraeus to be their chief salesman on Capitol Hill for the troop surge in Iraq. As the Washington Post admitted on Feb. 7, 2007, the White House set up Gen. Petraeus in the office of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and dragged members of the Senate off the floor to hear Petraeus' pitch. On Sept. 9, the Washington Post devoted a lengthy front-page story to the policy brawl between Adm. Fallon and Gen. Petraeus, quoting Administration officials admitting that there was very bad blood between the two flag officers.

EIR's sources have reported that before his testimony this week on Capitol Hill, Gen. Petraeus came under intense pressure from the Joint Chiefs of Staff and from his immediate boss, CENTCOM Commander Fallon, to make the case for a U.S. withdrawal, even while spinning the surge as a military success that must be allowed more time to play out.

The Gareth Porter story also made clear that Adm. Fallon is dead-set against any military action against Iran, and has reportedly vowed that there will be no military attack against the Islamic Republic "on his watch." According to Porter, Fallon is also convinced that the U.S. must rapidly withdraw troops from Iraq, to deal with other pressing threats in the theater of operation of CENTCOM, including Pakistan and Afghanistan. Adm. Fallon, according to Porter, is deeply worried that the Afghanistan mission was never completed, and that Pakistan is an unstable country with nuclear weapons.

Porter reported, "The conflict between Fallon and Petraeus over Iraq came to a head in early September. According to the Post story, Fallon expressed views on Iraq that were sharply at odds with those of Petraeus in a three-way conversation with Bush on Iraq the previous weekend. Petraeus argued for keeping as many troops in Iraq for as long as possible to cement any security progress, but Fallon argued that a strategic withdrawal from Iraq was necessary to have sufficient forces to deal with other potential threats in the region.

"Fallon's presentation to Bush of the case against Petraeus' recommendation for keeping troop levels in Iraq at the highest possible level just before Petraeus was to go public with his recommendations, was another sign that Petraeus' role as chief spokesperson for the surge policy has created a deep rift between him and the nation's highest military leaders. Bush presumably would not have chosen to invite an opponent of the surge policy to make such a presentation without lobbying by the top brass."