WASHINGTON — The Pentagon on Tuesday announced the abrupt resignation of the commander overseeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan who was seen as an internal critic of the Bush administration's troop decisions in Iraq.
The resignation of Navy Adm. William J. Fallon, head of U.S. Central Command, comes at a crucial time -- a month before highly anticipated recommendations for the future of U.S. involvement in Iraq -- and amid a debate among top military commanders over American deployments in the region.
Supporters of the administration's troop buildup have criticized Fallon for pushing for an accelerated reduction of U.S. forces in Iraq. By doing so, they argued, Fallon undermined the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus.
"He fought Petraeus every step of the way, creating unrealistic demands and extra work," said a former senior Pentagon official who has worked directly with both men. "And in so doing, he was not only undermining Petraeus, he was failing to support the president's policy."
Despite the increasingly heated bickering, Fallon's decision, representing the departure of a combatant commander in wartime, stunned even senior officers.
In a statement issued by his headquarters in Tampa, Fla., Fallon insisted that he had no substantive differences with the White House over policies in the Middle East. Instead, press reports of "a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives" had become a distraction, he said.
"Although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command area of responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there," Fallon said.
His resignation was announced at the Pentagon by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who also insisted Fallon had no significant policy differences with the White House.
Fallon's resignation came just a week after the publication of a controversial profile in Esquire magazine that portrayed the admiral as the primary opponent of an administration plan to bomb Iran.
Administration officials ridiculed the idea of Fallon as the lone obstacle, citing similar concerns by Gates and others. But current and former officers said administration officials were upset with the article because it portrayed Fallon at sharp odds with the president on a wider range of issues. Some of the current and former officers spoke on condition of anonymity when describing internal discussions.
