Page 2 of
2 The end of cowboy diplomacy, Part
2? By Jim Lobe
will not be bilateral talks between
the United States and Iran, or the United States
and Syria, within the context of these meetings".
But in another demonstration of the State
Department's confidence, its spokesmen have been
less categorical. While insisting that US
officials participating in the meetings would be
focused on the main issue - stabilizing Iraq -
they have also
repeatedly refused to rule out
talking directly with their Syrian and Iranian
counterparts about "related" issues.
Moreover, the presence at Saturday's
meeting in Baghdad of senior diplomats from the
other four permanent members of the UN Security
Council - to be augmented by the Group of Eight
foreign ministers in the second round next month -
increases the likelihood of broader discussions of
the kind advocated by the ISG.
Meanwhile,
realists have made other gains, beginning with the
replacement of Rumsfeld by Robert Gates, who,
until his nomination as defense secretary last
November, served on the ISG and is believed to
share its conclusions.
Gates and Rice -
and, for that matter, the new directors of
national intelligence and the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA), Admiral John McConnell and General
Michael Hayden, respectively - served on the
National Security Council together under president
George H W Bush and his national security adviser,
Brent Scowcroft, who, even more than Baker, is
considered anathema to the neo-conservatives,
particularly with respect to Middle East policy.
It has been Gates who, in contrast to
Cheney's persistent mutterings that "all options
are on the table", has been most insistent in
recent weeks that Washington has no plans to
attack Iran despite its military buildup in the
Persian Gulf. In taking this stance, Gates is
reportedly reflecting the views of the military
brass. Freed from Rumsfeld's bullying and
contempt, they have become far more outspoken in
internal discussions about their own opposition to
new military actions so long as US forces remain
bogged down in Iraq.
A report in the
National Journal on Friday that Gates is also
moving to curb the ability of Special Forces to
conduct covert operations in foreign countries,
such as Iran, without congressional oversight or
CIA direction and "dismantle" some of the
intelligence programs that helped pave the way to
war in Iraq suggests that he is taking independent
action to roll back some of Rumsfeld's most
controversial innovations.
"Bob Gates is
about to shut down a significant chunk of Vice
President Cheney's intelligence eyes and ears -
and to some degree, an inappropriate ability to
help drive covert actions," said Steven Clemons,
director of the American Strategy Program at the
New America Foundation in Washington.
But
while the realists are clearly ascendant, they are
not yet dominant, particularly with respect to
Middle East policy, where they remain hostage to
events in Iraq, Iran, Israel, Syria, Lebanon and
the occupied Palestinian territories - and
potential provocateurs - that in many ways are
increasingly beyond their control.
Cheney,
whose office remains a neo-conservative
stronghold, retains considerable influence,
particularly in its coordination with like-minded
colleagues in the White House on the National
Security Council staff, notably Abrams and others
in the Middle East bureau, and Deputy National
Security Adviser J D Crouch.
And a big
question lingers over Rice's own willingness to
take risks in pursuing the realist or ISG agenda,
in particular. Some observers note that she has
been very careful to permit other actors - Saudi
Arabia and the Europeans in the case of both the
Palestinians and Syria, the Iraqi government in
the case of Iran - to take the diplomatic lead,
leaving her less vulnerable to attacks by the
hawks.
"She understands that she has a
very short leash," said Joshua Landis, a Levant
expert at Oklahoma University. "She knows she
can't get too far off the reservation."
Thus while she replaced a neo-conservative
hawk, Robert Joseph, with a realist in the key
position of under secretary of state for arms
control and international security, she also
appointed Eliot Cohen, a dyed-in-the-wool
neo-conservative who is considered close to both
Abrams and Cheney, to a top advisory post, State
Department counselor. "It's always two steps
forward, one step back with her," said one
observer.
An even bigger question lingers
over Bush himself. While he has clearly given Rice
a lot more room to maneuver than her predecessor
Colin Powell could ever have imagined,
particularly with respect to North Korea, his own
views, especially on the Middle East, remain a
subject of unceasing speculation among the
capital's cognoscenti, hawks and realists alike.
Just this month, for example, he hosted a
"literary luncheon" in honor of Andrew Roberts,
author of History of the English-Speaking
Peoples Since 1900. In a recent interview,
Roberts called on Bush to fight in Iraq and
Afghanistan "for as long as it takes to achieve
complete and final victory over radical Islam ...
[and] not be afraid of threatening to widen the
struggle to include foreign countries that aid and
abet the insurgents" there.
Other guests
were some of the country's most hawkish
neo-conservatives, including Norman Podhoretz;
Paul Gigot, the editor of the Wall Street
Journal's editorial page; and AEI fellow Michael
Novak.
"Roberts said that history would
judge the president on whether he had prevented
the nuclearization of the Middle East," wrote one
of the guests.
As noted by the Financial
Times in an article titled "Four years of turmoil
put pragmatists in driving seat", the Eurasia
Group, a consultancy firm, has advised its clients
that it rates the chances of a US and/or Israeli
military attack on Iran before September 2008 at
60%.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
