An Adult Approach

The central tenet of the current administration's foreign policy is gun-barrel diplomacy. We don't talk to our enemies, or to those with whom we disagree, we bomb them, or threaten to. This means that when things go sour, as they inevitably do, we have no real options except to lather, rinse, repeat. Iraq is a prime example of this disasterous foreign policy.

This policy was designed by the neoconservatives who came into power with Vice President Cheney and soon-to-be former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. Their view was that as the only superpower the US could pretty much do whatever it pleased. Who would dare challenge us? The answer turned out to be a group of Iraqis who resented being invaded, and by all accounts, they've turned out to be quite successful. Now the US is bogged down in a war that cannot be won militarily.

It was with some relief that I learned of the existence of the Iraq Study Group led by James Baker, who had some success in the more normal types of diplomacy while Secretary of State in the administration of the current president's father. Whether one likes Jim Baker or not, at least he understands the nature of real-world foreign policy. Sometimes one has to talk to those with whom one disagrees. That apparently is the tack Mr. Baker is taking at the present time. From the NY Times:

James A. Baker III, the former secretary of state who is now Republican co-chairman of a bipartisan group examining strategic options in Iraq, has met several times with Syrian officials to discuss how they might cooperate with the United States, the Syrian ambassador here said Friday.

...An outside adviser to the group, speaking on condition of anonymity, said in an interview this week that the panel had also interviewed the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, Javad Zarif.

Mr. Baker has made little secret of his belief that the United States should negotiate with nations that it regards as enemies.

Geographically and politically, there can be no solution to the problems in Iraq without the assistance of Syria and Iran, particularly the latter. Thanks to the failed policy of the current administration, Iran is now a major power in the region and has considerable influence with the majority of the Iraqi government. Both Syria and Iran, who at the present are both involved with what is going on in Iraq, could, with the right encouragement, change the nature of that involvement to bring stability to Iraq, which would make extricating our troops much more feasible. The problem is that Mr. Bush appears at this point unwilling to take the steps necessary to enlist their help.

President Bush, though, has not seemed open to dramatic policy shifts. During an appearance in the Oval Office on Monday, Mr. Bush called on Syria to withdraw from Lebanon and stop “harboring terrorists,” and said Iran must suspend uranium enrichment before talks could begin.

Asking these countries to give something up before they will be allowed to help us is a moronic approach, yet at this point, that appears to be the road that the president prefers.

It's going to be a long two years.