![]() |
January 07, 2006The Former Secretaries Meet POTUSWith apologies to all the assembled former Secretaries of State and Defense, it appears that their meeting with President Bush was nothing much more than a photo op, contrary to my earlier hopes. If the most heated exchange was Madeline Albright (hardly the most talented foreign policy practitioner in the room, sorry to say), lecturing Dubya on dropping the ball on non-proliferation and such (the Clinton's Administration's record on such issues rather, shall we say, underwhelming)--with a stock, lame rejoinder from POTUS ("I can't let this comment stand"!) well, forgive me if I found the whole exercise a tad on the lame side. Rest assured, too, that no major new avenues were explored on Iraq strategy. Of course, after almost two lost years, the strategy in Iraq has improved very significantly over the past year, all told, particularly taking into account resource, political and other constraints. We are in discussions with some insurgents, doing our utmost to stoke divisions between Sunni nationalists and al-Qaeda terrorists killing innocent Sunnis in places like Ramadi. Meantime, we continue the train and equip effort, while remaining conscious that huge challenges remain ahead in terms of command and control, logistical back up, supply chains, ministerial competences, and more (like ensuring a multi-ethnic officer corp loyal to central authorities rather than sectarian interests). But were hard questions asked about troop levels, even keeping in mind the die has been cast and numbers will only trend down, in all likelihood, going forward? Or the specific measures being taken to de-militiatize increasingly autonomous areas like Kurdistan or the Shi'a south? Or how American and Iraqi forces might be better able to secure critical infrastructure, particularly of the revenue generating variety, like oil facilities? Or even, Bidenian and Albrightian huffing and puffing about a Contact Group aside, whether our dialogues with various neighbors were reaping as much fruit as really possible, or could perhaps be rendered more efficacious? Just to take one issue above, troops levels, did anyone deign to broach this angle: In the past several months, General Vines said that the flow of foreign fighters infiltrating Iraq had diminished in part because of nearly 20,000 Iraqi forces now stationed in restive Anbar Province, a series of American military operation in the Euphrates River Valley and increased cooperation from Syria and Saudi Arabia in tightening border controls. What's left unsaid above, of course, is that with more troops the tussle on placing the troops in the Fallujan heartland versus the border areas would have been mitigated somewhat. And while I acknowledge, as I said above, that the die has been largely cast on troop levels (for a huge confluence of reasons, many of them that make a lot of sense, the numbers are going to trend south now going forward), I still flag this as people like McCain were suggesting an increase of 10,000 rather than reductions below 138,000 (even post December 15th elections). All this to say, this was more a photo op and P.R. exercise that 'no one in the room is for immediate withdrawal' kinda shin-dig (this last, it should be said, an important point to be made in a bipartisan setting notwithstanding its obviousness). That's all well and good, but I guess I had naively expected a tad more to emerge from this distinguished conclave. At the end of the day, Larry Eagleburger probably stole the show with his insouciant Gallic entrance (see photo below) and statement that they were all a bunch of "has-beens" anyway. A little jocular sarcasm sometimes puts things in proper perspective, doesn't it? Comments
An earlier administration summoned former secretaries and retired officers to help with an actual issue pending in Congress. When one of them, Dean Acheson, was asked afterward why the meeting had lasted so long he said, "We are all old and we are all eloquent." Bush isn't the first President to use "formers" for a photo op following a quickie briefing; Johnson did this for several years. I am a little surprised that all of the people in Bush's meeting accepted this sort of treatment so tamely. Posted by: Zathras at January 7, 2006 10:41 PM | Permalink to this comment![]() Greg: "...Of course, after almost two lost years, the strategy in Iraq has improved very significantly over the past year, all told, particularly taking into account resource, political and other constraints." Political constraints? Bush wanted the war, and got it. And f*cked it up. Foreign politics was less under his control, of course, which is why his office is called 'President of the **United States**', and not 'President of the **World**'. Resource constraints? Many, all of the administration's choosing. They wanted to fight a war on the cheap, they didn't want to prepare for real opposition. They deliberately did not start a serious ramp-up in September, 2001, even though it's now obvious that they regarded 9/11 as giving them the opportunity to go with the war. ![]() He doesn't consult: He's isolated, in a bubble, surrounded by yes-men. He consults: it's a photo-op, a publicity stunt. Jesus, man, you and I both know they isn't any thing Bush could possible do short of drop dead that would satisfy you. What's with the Old World cynicism anyway? At one time I too thought that was a sign of sophistication and deep thinking. That was a mistake. Posted by: NewSisyphus at January 8, 2006 06:11 AM | Permalink to this comment![]() Good Lord, I need to to preview that before posting! Please substitute: "Jesus, man, you and I both know there isn't anything Bush could possibly do short of drop dead that would satisfy you." for the third paragraph above. Personally, I blame the Bushmill's. Posted by: NewSisyphus at January 8, 2006 06:14 AM | Permalink to this comment![]() Thanks for the picture of Eagleburger. I saw a head-and-shoulders picture of him on the news and thought he was leaning on something, possibly a cane. Nice to see my guess confirmed. Posted by: Linkmeister at January 8, 2006 06:40 AM | Permalink to this comment![]() He doesn't consult: He's isolated, in a bubble, surrounded by yes-men. He consults: it's a photo-op, a publicity stunt. the problem is that Bush didn't "consult".... there was a 40 minute presentation by Bush and his generals, follwed by 10-15 minutes of "back and forth" --- in other words, each attended got about 70 seconds each--and that time included Bush's responses. And that was it. Literally all of the decision-makers in the administration "went to other meetings", and these luminaries were given a choice ---- tell Stephen Hadley (who is not considered a senior policy maker) what you think, or go home. indeed, this exercise didn't merely confirm the "Bush Bubble", it exacerbated the perception by making it appear that the "Bush Bubble" was inside a second "bubble" inside which his time advisors exist. Was Condi Rice really so busy that she couldn't sit down and talk with a few of the former Secs of State for a couple of hours? Is Rumsfeld really that arrogant that he thinks that he has nothing to learn from the collected former Secs of Defense that were there? ***************** of course, there is always the possibility that the Bush Bubble exists not to keep Bush "isolated" from others, but to "contain" him at this point. Rummy and Rice may not be the sharpest knives in the drawer, but they are smart enough to know the difference between "faith based foreign policy" and policies that have some connection with objective reality..... Posted by: lukasiak at January 8, 2006 03:48 PM | Permalink to this comment![]() "Jesus, man, you and I both know there isn't anything Bush could possibly do short of drop dead that would satisfy you." For myself, I'd be quite satisfied if he resigned and turned himself in for trial by the world court, followed by US federal court. What would he have to do to satisfy you? Posted by: J Thomas at January 8, 2006 06:36 PM | Permalink to this comment![]() J Thomas Thanks for proving once again one of the great truisms of our time: "Conservatives think Liberals are misguided and wrong, Liberals think Conservatives are evil and criminal, ![]() Newsisyphus, are you somehow suffering from the illusion that Bush is a conservative? I'm more libertarian than liberal myself. Bush has gotten us the biggest government ever, on borrowed money, and interfered in the lives of private citizens more than ever. He isn't a conservative, he's an aristocrat. Posted by: J Thomas at January 11, 2006 07:06 AM | Permalink to this comment![]() Newsisyphus, are you somehow suffering from the illusion that Bush is a conservative? I'm more libertarian than liberal myself. Bush has gotten us the biggest government ever, on borrowed money, and interfered in the lives of private citizens more than ever. He isn't a conservative, he's an aristocrat. Posted by: J Thomas at January 11, 2006 07:07 AM | Permalink to this comment![]() Newsisyphus, are you somehow suffering from the illusion that Bush is a conservative? I'm more libertarian than liberal myself. Bush has gotten us the biggest government ever, on borrowed money, and interfered in the lives of private citizens more than ever. He isn't a conservative, he's an aristocrat. Posted by: I Thomas at January 11, 2006 07:25 AM | Permalink to this comment![]() Sorry, I kept getting server errors that made it appear it hadn't gone through. Posted by: J Thomas at January 11, 2006 07:26 AM | Permalink to this comment![]() |
![]() |
Reviews of Belgravia Dispatch
"Awake"
--New York Times
Recent Entries
The UBL Tape
In-House Note Wanted: More Troops Questions Re: a Post-Sharon Israel Zbigniew Brzezinski Speaks The Former Secretaries Meet POTUS DeLay Steps Aside The Rancid Stench of L'affaire Abramoff The End of the Sharon Era? Haass on Iraq
Search
English Language Media
New York Times
Financial Times The Economist The Times The Spectator Daily Telegraph The New Yorker Washington Post New Criterion Washington Monthly New Republic National Review The Atlantic Harpers The Guardian Weekly Standard The Nation WSJ Opinion Real Clear Politics
Foreign Affairs Commentariat
Non-English Language Press
U.S. Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
Instapundit Mickey Kaus Josh Marshall Oxblog Katrina vanden Heuvel Armavirumque Daniel Drezner Kevin Drum Romenesko James Taranto Volokh Conspiracy &C (TNR) The Corner Laura Rozen Innocents Abroad Juan Cole Tom Maguire Matthew Yglesias Chequer-Board Spencer Ackerman Wonkette Brad DeLong The American Scene Eric Martin Mark Kleiman Winds of Change Jon Henke American Footprints Steve Clemons Jack Balkin Cunning Realist Democracy Arsensal Crooked Timber Austin Bay Becker-Posner James Wolcott UN Dispatch Matt Drudge Phil Carter Clive Davis Obsidian Wings Bainbridge America Abroad Red State Huffington Post The Plank Nikolas Gvosdev Times Watch Mitchell Report
Columnists
Tony Blankley
David Broder David Brooks Roger Cohen Maureen Dowd Fred Hiatt Jackson Diehl Thomas Friedman Bob Herbert Jim Hoagland Richard Holbrooke David Ignatius Robert Kagan Michael Kinsley Charles Krauthammer Nicholas Kristof Paul Krugman Robert Novak Mark Steyn Sebastian Mallaby Frank Rich John Tierney John Vinocur George Will Anne Applebaum The Reliable Source Washington Whispers Howard Kurtz
Think Tanks
Law & Finance
Barron's
Bloomberg Bruce MacEwen Bull and Bear Wise CBS Marketwatch Contrary Investor Corporate Counsel Blog Corp Law Blog D.C. Toedt Deal Lawyers Blog Financial Sense Forbes Fortune Hussman Funds Gretchen Morgenson Floyd Norris Safe Haven SCOTUS Blog The Street 10b-5 Daily Yahoo Finance
Security
Books
The City
Curbed
Gawker Lockhart Steele NY Magazine Nick Denton NY Post NY Press New York Observer Tribeca Trib Walk Through Village Voice
Western Europe
France
United Kingdom
Germany
Italy
Netherlands
Spain
Central and Eastern Europe
CIS/FSU
Russia
Armenia
East Asia
China
Japan
South Korea
Middle East
Egypt
Israel
Lebanon
Across the Bay
Lebanese Blogger Lebanese Abroad Lebanon Matters Lebop Bliss Street Journal American in Lebanon Beirut Spring For Lebanon
Syria
B.D. In the Press
The Sunday Times(UK)"If It Makes America Look Bad It Must Be True, Musn't It?"
The Guardian "Trial and Error" Online Journalism Review "Feeling Misquoted? Weblogs Transcripts Let the Reader Decide" Online Journalism Review "Bloggers Rate the Most Influential Blogs" (see chart) The Sunday Times (UK) "Rise of the Virtual Soapbox" MORE"
Archives
January 2006
December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
Categories
Area Studies
Beltway Banter Books Department Cultural Missives Euro-American Relations In-House News Iraq Legal Matters Mailroom Media Monitoring Middle East--Iran Middle East-Peace Process Philosophy Presidential Politics Terrorism U.S. Foreign Policy
|
![]() |
![]() |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
|||
![]() |