The General Stanley McChrystal Affair: A Case Study in Civil-Military Relations

In June of 2010 the publication of an article entitled, Runaway General in Rolling Stone magazine captivated the nation and ended the career of the commanding general in Afghanistan. The incident captured the national and international media for almost a week. For an intense period between 48 and 72 hours, when General Stanley McChrystals job hung in the balance, a focused national security dialogue occurred on the topic of whether or not he should retain his post. General McChrystal and his staff were not criticized for their lack of military competence, for their dissent over policy, or for failure to implement strategy. Their professionalism -- especially those professional competencies related to understanding the roles and responsibilities of military leaders vis-a-vis the civilian political leadership in the context of democratic civil-military relations -- was found wanting. The case of General McChrystals relief is detailed here for review so its elements can be mined and analyzed, thereby strengthening the civil-military norms at issue in the case. The incident provides an opportunity to examine the national dialogue of June 2010 as a window into the state of national consensus on principles of strategy and civil-military relations norms. Recommendations are offered in an attempt to emphasize the development of the political skills required to navigate the nexus of political-military collaboration and media engagement at the strategic level. PME curricula with sufficient emphasis on civil-military norms will yield commanders better prepared to lead, staffs more capable of supporting them, and enhanced trust between the political and military spheres that is essential for strategic success.