AMERICAN THINKER
October 28, 2012
October 28, 2012
Has General Ham Been Fired?
Mike Johnson
Has General Carter F. Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command, been fired for defying
Leon Panetta on Benghazi?
Glenn Reynolds, the Instapundit, ran a piece Saturday afternoon titled "Interesting Rumor
Concerning General Carter Ham and Stand Down Order." This piece is
presented as a rumor. It suggests that General Ham was told to stand down from
sending aid to Benghazi, that General Ham on his own decided to proceed, and
that he was then relieved of his command. Remember, all rumor at this point.
On 18 October 2012, Secretary of
Defense Leon Panetta participated in a "DOD News Briefing on Efforts to Enhance the Financial Health of the
Force." In his introductory remarks, Mr. Panetta said: "Today I am
very pleased to announce that President Obama will nominate General David
Rodriguez to succeed General Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command . .
."
I'll have a lot more to say about
General Carter Ham's service in the months ahead, but let me say this. Under
his leadership, AFRICOM has played a very central role in some very important
missions, from the NATO campaign in Libya that led to the fall of Gadhafi; to
successful counterterrorism efforts in Somalia and Yemen; to efforts that we
are now involved in, in Nigeria, Mali and elsewhere. General Ham has really
brought AFRICOM into a very pivotal role in that challenging region. Myself and
the nation are deeply grateful for his outstanding service. This is not a
rumor, but it also does not provide a reason for the change. Note that Mr.
Panetta gives no insight into General Ham's future. General Ham is not quite 61
years old and so has three years left before mandatory retirement age of 64. General Ham has been commissioned for 36 years
but did serve as an enlisted man prior to gaining his commission, so he might
have the mandatory retirement 40 years of service.
The New York Times ran an article by Elisabeth Bumiller titled "Panetta Says Risk Impeded
Deployment to Benghazi." The article refers to the night of 11/12
September and includes the following: As a result, Mr. Panetta said, he and two
top commanders "felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in
that situation." The commanders are Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. Carter F. Ham of Africa Command, which
oversees American military operations in Africa, including Libya. You probably
have seen similar clips on TV. The impression being given by Mr. Panetta is
that the three of them agreed upon the course of action.
Not how it works in the military.
Note also that the NYT piece, written eight days after Mr. Panetta's announcement, makes no mention of General Ham being replaced as commander of U.S. Africa Command. Is it not relevant?
Note also that the NYT piece, written eight days after Mr. Panetta's announcement, makes no mention of General Ham being replaced as commander of U.S. Africa Command. Is it not relevant?
