The Operator: The Double Life of a Military Strategist (Luttwak) By Laura Rozen

The Operator: The Double Life of a Military Strategist
Profile
By Laura Rozen
Thu. Jun 05, 2008

There’s one thing Edward Luttwak wanted me to know, before he asked if I had a cell phone, and if so, could I turn it off and remove its battery, presumably if improbably so that he couldn’t be traced. We were sitting in his office library in his family’s sprawling Victorian home in suburban Chevy Chase, Md., full of books from floor to ceiling in Greek, Latin and from the modern era, volumes by Clausewitz, Walter Lacquer, Theodore Draper’s account of Iran Contra and thousands of others. These included a recent U.S. Military Balance survey, cataloguing the F-14s, F-7s, Phantoms and every other significant piece of military anti-air equipment estimated to be held by Iran — statistics that Luttwak looked up and ticked off during the course of our interview.

“I am an operator,” Luttwak said.

Indeed he is, one who carries out field operations, extraditions, arrests, interrogations (never, he insists, using physical violence), military consulting and counterterrorism training for different agencies of the U.S., foreign governments and private interests. When we met, in February, the Drug Enforcement Agency was his latest client; Luttwak says he went to Colombia to help arrest and deliver a couple of Mexican drug runners wanted by the DEA.

<snip>

Luttwak first came to my attention by way of an obscure detail in incorporation papers I had retrieved from a government registrar a few years ago, that named him as an officer in a small private consulting company, I.S.I. Enterprises, Inc., headed by Michael Ledeen, the neoconservative historian and writer who had a key role in the Iran Contra affair and who more recently engineered meetings during the Bush administration between Pentagon officials and controversial arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar.

Luttwak said that he and Ledeen, both fluent Italian speakers who served as consultants to the Reagan administration, are still friends, but that he left their joint international consulting business soon after it was formed, after completing assignments for the security services of Italy and Spain. (After he left, according to Luttwak, Ledeen went on to do lobbying and consulting through the business in Africa.) Luttwak said that he doesn’t do the kind of more political covert action that his friend Ledeen favors.

<snip>

Many of these past associations emerged in a recent episode revealed during my meeting with Luttwak: that he was shown the infamous Niger forgeries by a friend with the Italian intelligence agency Sismi, when he was working as a consultant to a Sismi contractor named Luciano Monti in the 2001-2002 time frame, but that he refused to back-channel them to the Bush administration. (He never agrees to back-channel intelligence, Luttwak said, and these looked like forgeries to him.) The allegations in the forgeries, of course, became one of the Bush White House’s most controversial casus belli for the Iraq war — and, after proven phony even on the eve of the invasion, among the most embarrassing and politically damaging for the president and vice president, who cited the bogus uranium allegations despite warnings from the CIA not to.

<more>

http://www.forward.com/articles/13515/

why Laura Rozen is writing it. Is it to expose Luttwak? Why would he allow himself to be written about since he's a "shadowy" figure with a dual personality whose been involved in covert global "operations" that many of us here in the Progressive Community would find pretty despicable... Is he trying to tell Rozen's readership something? And, why is it in "Forward Magazine" and not out on one of the other Progressive outlets that Rozen writes for? :shrug:

who might have some insight. :eyes:

It's in the caption under his photo: "A BYZANTINE STRATEGY: In his latest book, Luttwak will argue that, in crafting its Iraq strategy, America should look to Byzantium."

Ms Rozen is presenting a portrait of Mr Luttwak. Or at least, that is my impression. I give Ms Rozen credit for allowing Mr Luttwak to speak for himself here. He makes a number of interesting comments and observations. For example:

I won't presume to say what that means, but it's fun to chew on it, to pull it apart and consider the assumptions that go into such a statement, if it is to make sense.

pointed out that Luttwak doesn't see himself as "religious," that it doesn't matter to him...it's all about the "men who make policy."

Why did he ever allow Rozen into his home? The article makes him out as a "Spook" but seems to "bring him into the fold" as just a kindly, curmudgeonly "operative."

The article for a non Jew was very odd to me....:shrug: that's why I asked.

I was surprised that Laura Rozen pointed out that Luttwak doesn't see himself as "religious," that it doesn't matter to him...it's all about the "men who make policy."

I thought Ms Rozen was suggesting to him that he is a product of his origins, his history. Isn't that true of all of us? And he rejected that. He likes to think of himself as a mover, as being in control - and not as being the moved, the controlled - so his rejection is not mysterious. But that rejection of his does fit perfectly with the view of him that Ms Rozen suggests and that he rejects.

Why did he ever allow Rozen into his home? The article makes him out as a "Spook" but seems to "bring him into the fold" as just a kindly, curmudgeonly "operative."

I'm guessing it was to promote the book. He doesn't seem to me the sort to fear journalists.

The article for a non Jew was very odd to me.... :shrug: that's why I asked.

I found it quite odd at first too, because Ms Rozen's presentation is so deadpan. We are all so used to propaganda and biased drool that when we run into discriminating reportage we don't quite know what to make of it.

You addressed all I wondered about...and my questions in the same way I wondered.......

Interesting...that he seems to be "above it all" and a "spook" and that Laura had access. I wonder why she put her "access on the line" and yet pointed out he was a "spook."

That photo of him...with his "mother and the other man by his father's side" ...that was interesting. I think she was saying something with that. But..whatever...it's an open Forum...don't want to speculate what she was doing...but that it wasn't picked up by Rolling Stone or Mother Jones...well..I don't know.

Thanks for your reply on this.

Ms Rozen hints at that with the cell phone battery bit. It seems likely to me that was to prevent recording or eavesdropping rather than "tracing". Maybe Mr Luttwak likes Forward, maybe MJ or RS were not comfortable with form of the piece, as you say it is kind to him. Ms Rozen's subtlety is to make her point anyway. I don't really see why Mr Luttwak should dislike the piece, and yet he comes across to me as, well, as he does.

coming off well to "me," reading it. But, it was her second interview with him. I wonder if there's more to come with him. Maybe her article is a "pre-emtive" against someone or somefolks who are going to try to throw some stuff at him ...down the line...in some investigation "bubbling under surface."

That the article appears in an appealing place yet the man renounces his religion is still peculiar...

It's intriguing if one likes mysteries...although, given the Bush years, my taste for them has been overpowered by living in one.

Oh, well. I'm sure it will make sense somewhere along the way. I appreaciate your responses.