Dialogue with Iran? Syria?








I know. You're just out of your league

Dana Milbank fantasizes in The Washington Post that The White House Gets Neighborly in the Middle East and Steve Clemons is dreaming that Chess Pieces Move: Bush Admin Officials Plan to Meet with Iranian and Syrian Reps in Neighborhood "Block Party," and I just think that the administration is continuing to muddle through and buy time. As I pointed a few months ago:
Indeed, when it comes to the Bush administration's policy towards Iran (and other global problems), much of what the pundits describe as "diplomacy" is actually nothing more than an attempt to "muddle through" one crisis after another; to come up with ad-hoc responses that reflect the existing political pressures at home and the balance of power abroad without advancing a consistent policy that articulates US interests by utilizing available power and selecting the necessary means to advance realistic goals.
(read the rest)
I think that part of all this excitement over the "opening" to Iran and Syria reflects the continuing wishful thinking among mainstream pundits that in the Washington drama, "Condi" is the Good Gal that is standing up to Bad, Bad Cheney. I don't buy that, and as readers of this blog know, I'm a long time basher of our chief diplomat. See herecondoleeza-mackinder.html#links and here.

Comments

Anonymous said…
"Block Party" is the wrong image

It's more high school - Condi is like someone in high school who has experienced a rapid and controversial rise in relative popularity due to her associations - both real and perceived - with someone who is officially part of the popular in group - In this case: Dubya.

This leads to many part invites - but much backbiting and resentment too. So Condi happened to notice a party going on among some of the not so popular nations, but she was not really welcome, just unofficially granted access due to her temporary status.

But these less popular nations still dislike and resent her - just as they dislike and resent the Dubya even though they grant him his title.
11:37 AM
Leon Hadar said…
You make her sound more complex and interesting than she really is. She's just not very bright and incompetent and she certainly doesn't know what she is doing. I'm starting to miss Warren Christopher...
9:26 PM
aelkus said…
The press built her up into some kind of super-diplomat, when she's really just an average functionary carrying out orders.
8:44 AM
Anonymous said…
Ok - You're right, I was making her sound too complicated. But cut me some slack, with Condi some creative license is necessary. Otherwise, reality is too dull.

Condi just hired Elliot Cohen - a man known , as of late, for hoping - in the pages of Vanity Fair (as noted on Leo's blog) for a new President on a white horse.

How do Republicans get away with hiring someone critical like Cohen - without some PR backlash?
3:56 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

Image
Matt Barganier desconstructs Andrew Sullivan's mea sorta culpa on Iraq in Time magazine (Sullivan seen above in a thoughtful pose on Bill Maher's "Real Time"). There have been many of those in recent weeks (including by WFB and Fukuyama ). In an commentary published last year, Oops! I helped start a War which was about one of the earlier apologizing-war-aplogists, I pointed out to the contrast between the way the losers who operate in the market (including financial analysts) are punished and the reality in which the losers in the political game (including foreign policy analysts) rarely get punished: Imagine: for a few years you were investing the money you had saved for your daughter's college education in one of those moderately conservative plans that provided some increase in the value of the investment without exposing it to major risks. But then your financial planner – let's call him Ken P. – got in touch with you and came up with a really great ide...
Read more

When will Israel attack Iran?

Image
I'm not an "Intelligence analyst" and I don't play one on television. But I urge you to study the following items: 1. Seymour Hersh new piece in The New Yorker, "The Next Act: Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" 2. Tony Karon's "Israel's Domestic Political Games Raises the Danger of a U.S.-Iran War." 3. Aluf Benn's "Olmert's Drums of War" in Haaretz . 4. Bush:I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran. 5. Michael Oren's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal on November 16 which is only accessible to subscribers. So here are a few interesting quotes: Much like 1967, Israel faces a Middle Eastern leader who has repeatedly sworn to wipe it off the map, and to that end is assiduously trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Like Nasser, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can cripple Israel economically by keeping it in a state of alert, driving away foreign investment and tourism. In the absence of interna...
Read more