Rice's feckless missions
Rice's feckless missions
The secretary of state has visited 60 countries, but one has to search high and low for any outcomes from any of her trips
Georgie Anne Geyer,
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and Universal Press Syndicate
July 27, 2007
WASHINGTON - Condoleezza Rice is a woman of extraordinary intellect and has a charming personality. Her manner is usually gracious and ingratiating. I often find myself an admirer. There is only one problem: She travels too much.
President Bush announced this week that this fall she will oversee a major conference (somewhere) of those nations and parties that shared his "vision of a Palestinian state at peace with Israel." He also has sponsored just-retired British Prime Minister Tony Blair as the special envoy to the Middle East for the international Quartet -- the European Union, the United Nations, the United States and Russia, which have been trying, without any success, to achieve that seductive peace.
By undertaking this conference, the administration has consigned the rest of the world to oblivion once again. Just within the last few weeks, the president canceled a summit with Southeast Asian leaders in Singapore; Secretary of State Rice skipped meetings in Africa and the Philippines; and Defense Secretary Robert Gates canceled a visit to Latin America. All of these were important diplomatic meetings, particularly in an era when -- think Iraq -- these regions have all been ignored the last few years.
But the effort would be worth it, if only we could solve the central issue poisoning the Middle East, the decades-old Palestinian question, right? The times would justify such focused attention if something could really come of it, correct? Right and correct! The problem is there is as little serious thinking going into this major priority as has gone into the Middle East for seven years. Think just a moment about the setup.
Condi Rice has now visited an amazing 60 countries (she is in Lisbon this very week). No doubt, she has had a good time and has learned a great deal, while telling the Iranians off at the last Middle East conference and constantly lecturing the Palestinians on their abundant failures. But one searches high and low for any outcomes from any of her trips.
The only diplomatic deal made under her watch has been the still-pending but nonetheless impressive agreement for North Korea to shut off its nuclear reactors; although this was actually carried through by Washington's excellent diplomat, Ambassador Christopher Hill, Rice deserves credit for letting it happen. But one should note here that Hill's problem-solving tactics, supported remarkably by China and four other nations, are exactly the opposite of the White House's God-driven apocalyptic visions.
But a Middle East peace process? Now? One sees so little hope in the way they are going about it that the better answer, with the quagmire in Iraq sucking us in deeper every day, is for the White House and its minions just to do nothing.
First of all, nothing has been set up diplomatically. The administration continues to blame the Palestinians for every problem there and, although they have shown incompetence and often cruelty, the fact is nothing happens on its own. For an Israeli-Palestinian peace, the United States would have to become an independent negotiator, in the style of James Baker in the administration of Father Bush, and force both sides to negotiate and compromise.
This administration will not, for instance, put appropriate pressure on the Israeli right to dismantle some of the West Bank settlements (an absolute necessity for peace), even though one of the most visionary Israeli leaders, Shimon Peres, has been chosen as the new Israeli president. Peres, now 84, still advises that Israel get rid of the territories it has occupied for 40 years and stresses the practical idea of an economic zone for the entire region. But there is little evidence that this administration will seriously help Peres.
How in the world, for 40 years, could two of the world's most developed countries -- the U.S. and Israel -- have allowed such horrors to fester? How is it that they have not applied some modicum of the wisdom of educated peoples to this burning situation?
Ah, but now, you say, we have the ebullient Tony Blair, the former prime minister who apparently never read any of the books about the Brits' disastrous experience in Iraq in the 1920s. He, after all, has from the beginning of our self-imposed troubles urged Bush to attack the Israeli-Palestinian problem. But no, the White House and even the European Union have made it clear that Blair is only a spokesman to the Palestinians, to deal with economic problems such as water and sewage. So, a waste of still another potential moment.
In addition, as The Economist of London writes in its cover story this week -- and as many insiders in Washington have predicted for months -- the Bush administration, along with Israel, is still seriously considering an attack on Iran against its nuclear potential. As the magazine writes, "the world is teetering on the edge of a terrifying crisis. ... It may seem hard to believe that America or Israel is pondering an attack on a much bigger Muslim country. But they are ..."
As impossible as it may seem, we Americans probably have not yet seen the worst of it. This hapless and incompetent administration, having failed at everything it has attempted, blithely bumbles on, without any understanding of either the Middle East or human nature, without realistic purpose or the techniques needed to enforce even the best of intentions.
Condi -- stay home!
----------
Georgie Anne Geyer is a syndicated columnist based in Washington. E-mail: gigi -geyer@juno.com
The secretary of state has visited 60 countries, but one has to search high and low for any outcomes from any of her trips
Georgie Anne Geyer,
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and Universal Press Syndicate
July 27, 2007
WASHINGTON - Condoleezza Rice is a woman of extraordinary intellect and has a charming personality. Her manner is usually gracious and ingratiating. I often find myself an admirer. There is only one problem: She travels too much.
President Bush announced this week that this fall she will oversee a major conference (somewhere) of those nations and parties that shared his "vision of a Palestinian state at peace with Israel." He also has sponsored just-retired British Prime Minister Tony Blair as the special envoy to the Middle East for the international Quartet -- the European Union, the United Nations, the United States and Russia, which have been trying, without any success, to achieve that seductive peace.
By undertaking this conference, the administration has consigned the rest of the world to oblivion once again. Just within the last few weeks, the president canceled a summit with Southeast Asian leaders in Singapore; Secretary of State Rice skipped meetings in Africa and the Philippines; and Defense Secretary Robert Gates canceled a visit to Latin America. All of these were important diplomatic meetings, particularly in an era when -- think Iraq -- these regions have all been ignored the last few years.
But the effort would be worth it, if only we could solve the central issue poisoning the Middle East, the decades-old Palestinian question, right? The times would justify such focused attention if something could really come of it, correct? Right and correct! The problem is there is as little serious thinking going into this major priority as has gone into the Middle East for seven years. Think just a moment about the setup.
Condi Rice has now visited an amazing 60 countries (she is in Lisbon this very week). No doubt, she has had a good time and has learned a great deal, while telling the Iranians off at the last Middle East conference and constantly lecturing the Palestinians on their abundant failures. But one searches high and low for any outcomes from any of her trips.
The only diplomatic deal made under her watch has been the still-pending but nonetheless impressive agreement for North Korea to shut off its nuclear reactors; although this was actually carried through by Washington's excellent diplomat, Ambassador Christopher Hill, Rice deserves credit for letting it happen. But one should note here that Hill's problem-solving tactics, supported remarkably by China and four other nations, are exactly the opposite of the White House's God-driven apocalyptic visions.
But a Middle East peace process? Now? One sees so little hope in the way they are going about it that the better answer, with the quagmire in Iraq sucking us in deeper every day, is for the White House and its minions just to do nothing.
First of all, nothing has been set up diplomatically. The administration continues to blame the Palestinians for every problem there and, although they have shown incompetence and often cruelty, the fact is nothing happens on its own. For an Israeli-Palestinian peace, the United States would have to become an independent negotiator, in the style of James Baker in the administration of Father Bush, and force both sides to negotiate and compromise.
This administration will not, for instance, put appropriate pressure on the Israeli right to dismantle some of the West Bank settlements (an absolute necessity for peace), even though one of the most visionary Israeli leaders, Shimon Peres, has been chosen as the new Israeli president. Peres, now 84, still advises that Israel get rid of the territories it has occupied for 40 years and stresses the practical idea of an economic zone for the entire region. But there is little evidence that this administration will seriously help Peres.
How in the world, for 40 years, could two of the world's most developed countries -- the U.S. and Israel -- have allowed such horrors to fester? How is it that they have not applied some modicum of the wisdom of educated peoples to this burning situation?
Ah, but now, you say, we have the ebullient Tony Blair, the former prime minister who apparently never read any of the books about the Brits' disastrous experience in Iraq in the 1920s. He, after all, has from the beginning of our self-imposed troubles urged Bush to attack the Israeli-Palestinian problem. But no, the White House and even the European Union have made it clear that Blair is only a spokesman to the Palestinians, to deal with economic problems such as water and sewage. So, a waste of still another potential moment.
In addition, as The Economist of London writes in its cover story this week -- and as many insiders in Washington have predicted for months -- the Bush administration, along with Israel, is still seriously considering an attack on Iran against its nuclear potential. As the magazine writes, "the world is teetering on the edge of a terrifying crisis. ... It may seem hard to believe that America or Israel is pondering an attack on a much bigger Muslim country. But they are ..."
As impossible as it may seem, we Americans probably have not yet seen the worst of it. This hapless and incompetent administration, having failed at everything it has attempted, blithely bumbles on, without any understanding of either the Middle East or human nature, without realistic purpose or the techniques needed to enforce even the best of intentions.
Condi -- stay home!
----------
Georgie Anne Geyer is a syndicated columnist based in Washington. E-mail: gigi -geyer@juno.com
posted by Carlos T Mock at 6:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home