OBAMA AND PETRAEUS – CLASH COMING? – AT 7:45 A.M. ET:  We've written here that the most fascinating relationship in modern politics may be the one developing between President Obama and General David Petraeus.

Did Obama pick Petraeus to run the Afghanistan war in order to win, or is he setting Petraeus up to blame him for failure and sidetrack him as a presidential candidate?  Is Petraeus in the Afghan fight for the duration, or will he resign in protest as his plans are thwarted, and then enter the presidential arena?

Hey, now that's a movie.  With potential sequels.  Get me an agent.

Now, in a superb piece of traditional reporting, Rowan Scarborough of the Washington Times reveals that the Petraeus war-fighting doctrine is in direct contradiction to President Obama's approach to the threat of terrorism.  A clash almost seems inevitable:

The White House's official policy of banning the word "Islam" in describing America's terrorist enemies is in direct conflict with the U.S. military's war-fighting doctrine now guiding commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan.

John O. Brennan, President Obama's chief national security adviser for counterterrorism, delivered a major policy address on defining the enemy. He laid out the White House policy of detaching any reference to Islam when referring to terrorists, be it al Qaeda, the Taliban or any other group.

But Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the man tapped by Mr. Obama as the new top commander in Afghanistan, led the production of an extensive counterinsurgency manual in December 2006 that does, in fact, tell commanders of a link between Islam and extremists.

The Petraeus doctrine refers to "Islamic insurgents," "Islamic extremists" and "Islamic subversives." It details ties between Muslim support groups and terrorists. His co-author was Gen. James F. Amos, whom Mr. Obama has picked as the next Marine Corps commandant and Joint Chiefs of Staff member.

Do you see problems ahead?  Petraeus is from Mars, Obama is from Kenya.

The Petraeus counterinsurgency manual takes the position that, to understand the enemy, commanders must recognize terrorist links to Islam — its leaders in some cases, its fundraising and its infrastructure. Forces must fight "Islamic extremists," it says, differently from the Viet Cong or followers of Saddam Hussein.

"Islamic extremists use perceived threats to their religion by outsiders to mobilize support for their insurgency and justify terrorist tactics," the manual states.

COMMENT:  Where does this clear split lead?  Petraeus is a superb politician, and it's possible he can paper over the differences.  Or, he can insist that his doctrine prevail, and hint at resignation if it doesn't, something that would deeply embarrass the Obamans. 

Petraeus is more popular than Obama, but still must be careful how he maneuvers.  A general must still show proper deference to civil authority, as Douglas MacArthur found out the hard way.

But the philosophical split is deep and real.  This is not Lincoln and Grant.  Those two agreed.  And it's not Roosevelt and Eisenhower.  They also agreed.  Both Grant and Eisenhower became president.

July 12, 2010