US completes large-scale Middle East exercise, even with amphibious forces stretched

AQABA, Jordan — Although officials insisted the annual multinational Eager Lion exercise that ended here Sunday was unrelated to sectarian violence across Jordan’s borders, regional tensions nonetheless affected the course of the two-week exercise.

Just days after the exercise began, the USS Bataan was ordered to the coast of Libya to be ready for a possible evacuation of U.S. personnel amid escalating fighting there.

Officials said the ship’s departure had minimal impact on the exercise.

“Bataan’s departure was demonstrative of the inherent flexibility of our amphibious forces,” Brig. Gen. Gregg Olson, commander of Task Force 51/59 and in charge of the amphibious forces deployed to U.S. 5th Fleet, said in an interview with Stars and Stripes.

Other units were retasked to assume different roles, and other nations stepped up to fill the gaps.

“I had no doubt that we were going to be able to do Eager Lion as close to originally planned as we were able to,” Olson said.

The ship left a significant portion of its embarked 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit Marines and equipment in Jordan to continue the exercise, and many were left wondering how they would get back to the ship.

Olson said some would board other ships, others would be flown out and the equipment, which includes light armored and amphibious assault vehicles, would be loaded onto the USS Gunston Hall.

The 22-nation exercise involving more than 12,000 personnel, about half of them American, took place amid the backdrop of escalating sectarian violence in neighboring Syria and Iraq. However, officials said the exercise, now in its fourth year, was not connected to any potential increase in U.S. assistance to the Syrian opposition, which President Barack Obama said in a recent foreign policy speech he would work with Congress on.

Jordan, a longtime U.S. ally, is seen as potentially vulnerable with the civil war raging next door in Syria. After last year’s Eager Lion exercise, the U.S. deployed F-16 fighter-bombers and Patriot missile interceptors to Jordan to boost its military capabilities. Some of the personnel from those units participated in this year’s exercise, but officials said there were no plans to leave any additional resources behind this time.

Officials emphasized that the purpose of the exercise was to improve coordination and cooperation.

In one demonstration to the media and civilian observers in a remote desert area, U.S. and Jordanian forces conducted a massive live-fire demonstration of a counterattack on an enemy position using close air support from various nations. In another, at a Jordanian naval base, U.S. and Jordanian Special Forces used helicopters, inflatable boats and patrol craft to demonstrate how they would regain control of a hijacked ferry and conduct a sea-based assault on a target ashore.

“There was true cooperation out there. That cooperation was fostered over the course of 10-days of training together, eating together, sharing the privations of the field together, working in concert with each other,” Olson said. “It’s a great piece of geography because of the ranges and the airspace available, and the welcoming of our partner nations.”

Interacting with the Jordanian troops was a highlight for American servicemembers.

“Even though we can’t speak the same language, we kind of speak the common language of our field,” said 1st Lt. Joshua Harvey, platoon commander of a 22nd MEU artillery battery. His unit spent three days with a Jordanian artillery battery. During that time he and members of his unit even learned a celebratory Bedouin dance called Hejeni, that is customary at weddings.

Harvey believes the interactions to be a worthwhile investment, even though it may be a different unit involved next time.

“If they have good experiences with us now, they will remember that when future operations happen,” he said.

simoes.hendrick@stripes.com

Twitter: @Hendricksimoes

Obama leaves intel panel smarting again

What Winston Churchill said of Secretary of State John Foster Dulles — that he was a bull who carried his own china shop around with him — is true of Susan Rice, who is, to be polite, accident prone. When in September 2012 she was deputed to sell to the public the fable that the Benghazi attack was just an unfortunately vigorous movie review — a response to an Internet video — it could have been that she, rather than Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, was given this degrading duty because Rice was merely U.N. ambassador, an ornamental position at an inconsequential institution. Today, however, Rice is Barack Obama’s national security adviser, so two conclusions must be drawn.

Perhaps she did not know, in advance of the swap of five terrorists for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the, shall we say, ambiguities about Bergdahl’s departure from his platoon in Afghanistan, and the reportedly deadly consequences of his behavior. If so, then she has pioneered a degree of incompetence exotic even for this 10-thumbed administration. If, however, she did know, and still allowed Obama to present this as a mellow moment of national satisfaction, she is condign punishment for his choice of such hirelings.

Perhaps this exchange really is, as Obama said in defending it, an excellent thing “regardless of the circumstances, whatever those circumstances may turn out to be.” His confidence in its excellence is striking, considering that he acknowledges that we do not know the facts about what would seem to be important “circumstances.”

Such as the note Bergdahl reportedly left before disappearing, in which he supposedly said he did not approve of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan. And the notably strong and numerous expressions of anger by members of Bergdahl’s battalion concerning his comportment and its costs.

Obama did not comply with the law requiring presidents to notify Congress 30 days before such exchanges. Politico can be cited about this not because among the media it is exceptionally, well, understanding of Obama’s exuberant notion of executive latitude but because it is not. Politico headlined a story on his noncompliance with the law “Obama May Finally Be Going Rogue on Gitmo.” Politico said Obama’s “assertive” act “defied Congress” — Congress, not the rule of law — in order “to get that process (of closing Guantanamo Bay prison) moving.” It sent “a clear message” that “Obama is now willing to wield his executive powers to get the job done.” Or, as used to be said in extenuation of strong leaders, “to make the trains run on time.”

The 44th president, channeling — not for the first time — the 37th (in his post-impeachment conversation with David Frost), may say: “When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Already the administration says events dictated a speed that precluded complying with the law.

This explanation should be accorded open-minded, but not empty-minded, consideration. It should be considered in light of the fact that as the Veterans Affairs debacle continued, Obama went to Afghanistan to hug some troops, then completed the terrorists-for-Bergdahl transaction. And in light of the fact that Obama waged a seven-month military intervention in Libya’s civil war without complying with the law (the War Powers Resolution) that requires presidents to terminate within 60 to 90 days a military action not authorized or subsequently approved by Congress.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee, says the administration told him he would be notified about negotiations for the release of terrorists. He now says he cannot “believe a thing this president says.”

Obama says his agents “consulted with Congress for quite some time” about prisoner exchanges with the Taliban. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, says there have been no consultations since 2011. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., says “I don’t like it when the White House says the intelligence committees were briefed. Because we weren’t.” He says Obama is “referring to ... 2011-2012, when I was still in grade school.”

Now, now. “Assertive” presidents can’t be expected to “go rogue” without ruffling feathers. And omelets cannot be made without breaking eggs. Etc.

This episode will be examined by congressional committees, if they can pierce the administration’s coming cover-up, which has been foreshadowed by the response to congressional attempts to scrutinize the politicization of the IRS. If the military stalls on turning over files to Congress pertaining to the five years of Bergdahl’s absence, we will at least know that there is no national institution remaining to be corrupted.

George F. Will is a member of Washington Post Writers Group.

Bergdahl’s father now under scrutiny himself

HAILEY, Idaho — In 2011, during his long five-year vigil, waiting helplessly at home while his son was held by Taliban extremists half a world away, Bob Bergdahl made a personal video for the Pakistani government that he hoped would be delivered to his boy, Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.

“These are my thoughts. I can remain silent no longer,” the father began. He stood in a black shirt, his bushy blond beard worn long, the kind sported by most militant men in the war-racked region.

In the three-minute video, he mentioned several high-ranking Pakistani generals by name, thanking them for their sacrifices. Then he went on to thank the Taliban forces that were holding his son.

“Strangely to some,” he said, “we must also thank those who have cared for our son for almost two years. We know our son is a prisoner, but at the same time a guest in your home.”

He then addressed his son, sending his love and assuring him: “We’ve been quiet in public. But we haven’t been quiet behind the scene.”

That video, along with other social media postings the 54-year-old Bergdahl made after his son was captured near the Afghan-Pakistani border in 2009, have come under greater scrutiny in the wake of the Obama administration’s controversial prisoner swap, in which the U.S. secured the 28-year-old sergeant’s release by freeing five Taliban leaders held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Back home, critics are demanding that the U.S. Army prosecute the younger Bergdahl for deserting his post before his capture, as has been claimed by other soldiers in his unit.

But the father is now under increased public scrutiny as well. Bob Bergdahl, many say, was waging his own undeclared war at home.

Over the years, residents of this small resort town in the shadow of the Sawtooth Mountains watched as he slowly changed over the long months of his son’s ordeal. Always private, the conservative Presbyterian everyone knew as the local UPS deliveryman further retreated into his shell. He’d moved to Idaho with his wife, Jani, after dropping out of the University of California, Santa Barbara. Bowe and his sister, Sky, were born there.

The elder Bergdahl learned Pashto, the language of his son’s captors, studied Arabic and immersed himself in the stories of other Americans held abroad. He began growing his hair and beard in solidarity with his son — its length and unruliness reminders to Wood River Valley residents of how long his son had been in captivity.

Few mentioned the beard, knowing its significance.

“Bob delivered packages to our office and most everyone’s offices,” said Hailey Mayor Fritz Haemmerle, a local lawyer who has known Bergdahl for 30 years. “You’d see him doing his job, but you never knew what to say. It’s one of those touchy subjects, like when someone dies. What do you say to the family? It’s not an easy conversation to have.

“The change in Bob’s visage told the story. And it was a drastic change.”

As the father had assured his son in the 2011 video, he was not quiet behind the scenes. As the years passed, Bergdahl accused the Obama administration of abandoning the matter of his son’s release. He developed sources in Afghanistan that were in contact with his son’s captors and traveled to Washington to argue his cause.

He began posting on Twitter and other social media. Slowly, he began to give lengthy interviews in which he criticized the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan.

“There is a dynamic here that has to change,” Bob Bergdahl said in a 2012 interview with the Idaho Mountain Express newspaper in which he criticized the stalled negotiations. He said swapping prisoners at Guantanamo for his son would be a “win-win” for the U.S. — retrieving a missing soldier while fostering goodwill with the Afghan people.

Meanwhile, he took to social media, posting nearly 5,000 messages on Twitter about his son’s case and that of other captives held in various places around the world. Sometimes he spoke out to Bowe, as he did this year, posting “2014 NEVER GIVE UP! YOU ARE NOT FORGOTTEN! YOU WILL COME HOME! mom & dad.”

Bergdahl says he was tortured by Taliban captors

PARIS — A senior U.S. official says Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl (boh BURG'-dahl) tells military officials that he was tortured, beaten and held in a cage by his Taliban captors in Afghanistan after he tried to escape.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he's not authorized to discuss what Bergdahl is saying while being treated at a U.S. military medical facility in Germany.

The official says it is difficult to verify the accounts Bergdahl is providing about conditions of his captivity in the hands of the Taliban. He was released a week ago after nearly five years in captivity.

The New York Times reports Sunday that Bergdahl is not yet emotionally prepared to return to his family.

His release in exchange for five Taliban militants from Guantanamo Bay has ignited a political firestorm.

Air shows' link to military recruitment iffy

Flying free from federal budget cuts that grounded them last year, the Navy's Blue Angels will zoom at Mach-1 over the Latrobe area on Sunday at the Westmoreland County Air Show.

But even at 700 mph, the Navy daredevils — and other flashy military demonstration teams — can't outrun questions about their future.

Congress is debating whether those teams land enough recruits to justify multimillion-dollar costs, especially in an era of Pentagon austerity. The sequestration budget deal between Congress and the White House is expected to trim $45 billion annually from the Defense budget, and lawmakers have slashed other noncombat programs such as ceremonial bands.

A Tribune-Review analysis of Defense spending on the Blue Angels and the Air Force's Thunderbirds puts combined annual expenses at $70 million to $140 million, depending on how the budgets are calculated. The budget for the Army's Golden Knights is $303,000 this year without personnel costs, down 25 percent since 2012.

Military officials defend the teams as time-honored institutions that woo youngsters into uniforms.

Yet some experts say there's no way to track whether air shows lead to enlistments.

“We know that people who go to military air shows likely have served, or have no negative feelings about military service, and they're willing to reinforce that by taking their children to events like parades or air shows,” said David Segal, a University of Maryland sociologist and armed forces expert.

“There probably is a payoff there, but we don't know what it is yet. The only way to study that would be to ask people, year after year, whether they went to an air show and whether it influenced their decisions as young adults to enlist.”

The Navy and Air Force teams take turns headlining about 70 of the more than 300 air shows held annually in the United States, according to the Virginia-based International Council of Air Shows, the industry's trade organization.

Understated numbers?

Without providing detailed budgets, Air Force officials told Congress that the Thunderbirds cost taxpayers about $35.5 million a year.

Air Force Maj. Darrick Lee said the Thunderbirds' budget this year is about $30 million, not including personnel costs.

When in host cities for days, Lee said, “We're going into schools and meeting with a wide range of citizens. We're educating people about their Air Force.”

Air Force studies say it consistently met enlistment goals since 1999, including 2013, when sequestration grounded planes.

With the Thunderbirds mothballed, the Air Force and Air National Guard enlisted 44,858 recruits — 2,266 more than planned, according to the Pentagon.

The Navy says it spends about $40 million annually on the Blue Angels program, including the Marines Corps' “Fat Albert” C-130J Super Hercules support plane. With the joint Navy-Marine program grounded last year, the two services exceeded enlistment goals with 86,614 active and reserve personnel.

A 2012 analysis performed at the Naval Postgraduate School by senior officers Andre Fields, Donald Gardner and Christopher Cousino suggests the Navy failed to disclose the full costs of the Blue Angels.

Adding up the 2009 estimated expenditures for pay, housing, medical services, retirement benefits, fuel, maintenance and aircraft costs spread over time — plus the risks of damage to planes or injury to personnel — brings the Blue Angels' real price tag to nearly $99 million per year, at least twice the official estimate, they said.An F-18 Hornet for the Blue Angels costs more than $21 million. A new “Fat Albert” runs nearly three times that, according to recent congressional testimony.

“The Navy leaders left out relevant costs,” explained Hoover Institution research fellow David R. Henderson, a professor of economics who supervised the analysis.

Henderson notes he does not speak for the Navy, but he defends the study and its conclusion: When it comes to recruiting, the team's “costs outweighed the benefits.”

For every $100 spent on the team, he said, the Navy recoups 83 cents in recruiting benefits — and it remains a bad deal even if the Navy's lower cost estimates are used.

The Navy did not return messages seeking comment.

Demographics matter

Industry surveys reveal air show spectators are similar to those who watch professional tennis or golf: overwhelmingly white, married, well-educated and affluent.

Couples in their mid-40s, who bring children, dominate the crowds; two of every five adults boast a household income above $75,000.

“For advertisers, we're right in the sweet spot,” said International Council of Air Shows President John Cudahy.

But it might not be so sweet for military recruiters.

An Army National Guard sports marketing campaign landed the service in the congressional hot seat. A 2012 report found the Guard spent $32 million on NASCAR and IndyCar sponsorships but could not prove it netted one recruit. Like 66 percent of adults at an air show, about seven in 10 NASCAR fans is older than 35 — too old to enlist.

Sociologists say military recruits are a diverse group, but certain factors make someone more likely to enlist. Generally ages 19 to 21, they typically grew up in single-parent or nontraditional families and enlisted a year after high school. The more education and wealth their parents have, the less likely they will join.

The proportion of blacks and Hispanics enlisting is far larger than those attending air shows.

All-American events

Beyond recruitment or a temporary economic spark, experts say air shows might fulfill a more important purpose.

Only a few Americans are able or willing to enlist. Congress continues to shave costs by closing and consolidating bases. Veterans from World War II and the wars in Korea and Vietnam are aging, and the military likely never will be as large as during the draft era.

So for millions of Americans, air shows are one of the few tangible ties to their armed forces.

Military branches “want to continue to connect to the American people, and air shows do that so organically,” Cudahy said. “When you go to a show, you'll see military aircraft from earlier times next to the most high-tech machinery built today.

“Only 1 percent of Americans will serve in the military, which is why air shows have become a continuing conversation with the American people. They showcase the military at its finest and remind everyone what a great brand they are.

“It's hard to watch a cutting-edge ballistic submarine going through its paces, but everyone can look up to the sky and see the Navy's Blue Angels.”

Carl Prine is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7826 or cprine@tribweb.com.

Green Berets: The silent experts of unconventional warfare

COLUMBIA, SC — John Rollinson of Camden said he did the things that no one else wanted to do. He did it for his country, for the men on his left and on his right.

Mike Mika of Cayce fought three tours in Vietnam to help free the oppressed, words he believed and willed his life to.

Newberry’s Johnnie Graham went into hotly contested areas of conflict around the world, sometimes by himself.

Each learned the language and the culture of the country where he was deployed. They wore the local clothing and moved among the local people, in small combat groups or by themselves. But they also were trained in the advanced unconventional warfare of the elite Army Special Forces, also known as the Green Berets - with all the mystique and respect that designation brings.

“It is one of the things that you never forget,” said Rollinson, now 68. “I don’t know how to explain it. It’s an inner feeling that no one can take. It’s a part of your soul.”

An illustrious history

This week, Green Berets from across the country will meet in Columbia for the 50th annual convention of the National Special Forces Association.

The Special Forces’ history is a long and illustrious one, said Mika, who’s 72.

They can trace their lineage to the Revolutionary War and South Carolina’s own Francis Marion, the “Swamp Fox.” Marion’s tactics in guerrilla warfare against the British sparked a long line of men trained in the art of unconventional warfare.

The modern Special Forces originated during World War II with the Office of Strategic Services, also known as the OSS.

“The Devil’s Brigade” was tasked with going behind enemy lines in Europe and elsewhere to gather intelligence and organize armed resistance groups.

In 1952, the 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne) was formed in conjunction with the Psychological Warfare School at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. It and the 77th Special Forces Group (now the 7th) specialized in reconnaissance, counter-terrorism and organizing and working with foreign troops.

The Green Berets gained their famed moniker during the Vietnam War. President John F. Kennedy met with Gen. William Yarborough at Fort Bragg in 1961 and said that the Green Beret is “a symbol of excellence, a badge of courage, a mark of distinction in the fight for freedom.”

The name stuck and so did the headgear that has become the identity of the group.

Graham, 47, served as a Green Beret for 13 years. He said that it was one of the most rewarding jobs of his 23-year military career.

“It takes heart and dedication to wear that distinction of the Green Beret,” Graham said. “I get to be around those guys like Mike (Mika) and John (Rollinson) and, as a younger person, know that these guys are the lineage of the Special Forces. It is humbling.”

Stabilizing the area

The Green Berets became a pop-culture mainstay after the 1966 flattering radio hit sung to a folk tune, “The Ballad of the Green Berets,” and John Wayne’s 1968 film, “The Green Berets.”

But unlike Hollywood’s evanescent spotlight, the combat force will remain one of the upper echelon forces the United States deploys in battle.

“Our job is to go in and work with the local populace, and as we gather the support of the locals, we provide medical support, put wells in, develop defensive positions and anything else we need to do to stabilize an area,” Mika said.

Assigned to stay long-term in an area of conflict, Green Berets are considered force multipliers: They organize a segment of the local population as an armed resistance.

During the Vietnam War, Mika said, no more than 3,000 Green Berets fielded an army of 75,000 locals, including the indigenous Dega people and some local Vietnamese forces called the Civilian Irregular Defense Group. This small army carried out guerrilla-type attacks on Vietcong forces throughout the war.

Green Berets also would see duty in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Graham was among the first of the Green Berets on the ground in Afghanistan, working a security detail for Special Operations commanders.

“We went in and and dealt with the indigenous forces, trained and equipped them to fight against the Taliban,” Graham said. “For the most part they were happy that we were there and helping them get their country back.”

In Afghanistan, many of the soldiers grew beards and wore schemaghs to blend in with the indigenous forces they were training.

Training the ‘Silent Professionals’

Matthew Van Laan, 23, of Lexington recently graduated from the University of South Carolina with a degree in economics. He received a few job offers as a financial adviser but felt a greater calling for his life.

“I understand what I am getting into,” Van Laan said. “The unknown gives me a little bit of fear, but I know guys who have gone through the training. The trainers are not there to hurt you, they are there to make you better.”

Van Laan will leave June 23 for 18X, the program designed to turn civilians into Green Berets. After he graduates, he’ll continue to the five phases of becoming a Green Beret at Fort Bragg. Candidates train for 62 weeks and morph into highly specialized soldiers.

Lt. Col. Steve Hayden at Fort Bragg says that for every 2.25 candidates that go through the training process, one Green Beret comes out the other side.

“It takes a special person to do this training,” Hayden said. “There are no others who are able to conduct UW (unconventional warfare) like we do.”

Sgt. 1st Class Brian Lewis, who works in Army recruitment in Greenville, said becoming a Green Beret is not something that is simply a given.

“It’s not one of those things for a soldier want-to-be,” Lewis said. “They are put in special situations where a normal soldier wouldn’t be put in. They are the ‘Silent Professionals.’”

Graham remembers Green Beret training and simulating the rescue of a downed helicopter pilot. After retrieving the pilot, Graham and his 10-man team had to trek 8 miles while carrying a 210-pound pilot made of sand bags.

“The biggest thing for us is the guy standing next to you who has a green beret on,” Graham said. “He has gone through the same thing you have, and you can rely on him nine times out of 10. The other one time, you have to rely on yourself.”

U.S. Navy rescues 282 people from Mediterranean

By Roger Ainsley

Los Angeles Times

Published: June 7, 2014

The U.S. Navy reported Saturday that two American warships had rescued nearly 300 people from boats in the Mediterranean Sea after one of the small craft began to sink.

The amphibious assault ship Bataan and guided missile frigate Elrod responded after receiving a report from an Italian military aircraft that had sighted six small vessels, the Navy said in a statement.

The Americans provided food, water, medical care and temporary shelter before transferring 277 people to a Maltese military patrol boat. CNN reported that five others were flown to Malta for medical treatment.

It was not immediately clear who the people were. However, refugees by the tens of thousands, many from sub-Saharan Africa, have attempted to cross the Mediterranean to Italy in recent years, often in craft that are dangerously overcrowded and not seaworthy. More than 100 migrants died early last month when three boats sank in the Mediterranean.

The Italian navy reported in early May that it had picked up 4,362 migrants at sea in one week, bringing the total number transferred to Italy since October to more than 30,000 at that time.

Times staff writer Ainsley reported from Los Angeles.