As far as most knowledgeable observers can tell, the process that led Gen. Kevin P. Byrnes to be relieved of duty is without precedent.
The Army has been hurt over the past year by detainee-abuse cases and has been accused of not going after top officers allegedly involved in such abuse. Army officials said relieving Byrnes was meant to show the public that the service takes issues of integrity seriously.
“We all swear to serve by the highest ideals, and no matter what rank, when you violate them, you are dealt with appropriately,” said one Army officer familiar with the case. “Relief of command is a huge consequence. He’s had an extraordinary career, but at the end of the day, the Army has to hold people accountable for their conduct.” […]
“Usually there is no incentive to bring criminal charges, because they are taking his career and flushing it down the toilet,” [Neal A. Puckett, a military defense lawyer] said. “There’s not much more that you can do to a high-ranking officer like that. His legacy is ruined.”
This guy must have done something truly indefensible, right? I mean, as Spencer Ackerman noted yesterday, we’ve seen generals who’ve overseen torture of detainees and then get caught lying to Congress about it. Usually, instead of “holding people accountable for their conduct,” the Bush gang gives promotions to high-ranking military officials when they’re caught doing something heinous.
If the administration won’t punish torturers, Byrnes must have really committed a crime against humanity. Or not.
The four-star Army general who was fired this week had been romantically involved with a civilian woman while separated from his wife, his attorney said Wednesday.
Lt. Col. Dave Robertson, the attorney for Gen. Kevin Byrnes, said the woman was not connected to the military and the relationship has ended.
Yes, when it’s sex vs. torture, Bush’s Pentagon has its priorities straight.
I’m not saying Byrnes is a saint or should be free of accountability, but we’re talking about a man with a sterling record who was just three months from retirement anyway. Byrnes has been the head of the Army Training and Doctrine Command, and by all accounts did his job perfectly. The affair, while obviously wrong, had nothing to do with his official responsibilities.
If the Pentagon is serious about “taking issues of integrity seriously,” I’m delighted. Once their done holding officials involved with the torture scandals responsible for their conduct, they can take a look at Byrnes’ “crimes” and determine the appropriate punishment. In the interim, destroying this man for an affair is ridiculous. As the Post editorialized today:
From this incident, it is possible to draw only one conclusion: It’s okay for officers to oversee units that torture civilians and thereby damage the reputation of the United States around the world, do terrible harm to the ideological war on terrorism and inspire more Iraqis to become insurgents. Having an affair with a civilian, on the other hand, is completely unacceptable and will end your career.
It’s true, of course, that we don’t know all the details of this case, and it is possible that some aspect of it will justify the dismissal of Gen. Byrnes. But if there is a justification, it had better involve national security at the very highest level.