On The Road Again
After years of ignoring everything in the Middle East but the destruction of Iraq, President Bush has decided to make a little visit to the region to show how very much he really cares. The ostensible reason for his tour is to keep the Israelis and Palestinians working on a peace agreement (one that would be finalized just before the 2008 election), but he apparently has some additional goals in mind, according to an article published in the UK's The Economist.
The US president, George W Bush, is planning an eight-day visit to the Middle East in early January in a bid to salvage some positive achievements from his administration's largely dismal legacy to the region. The main purpose of the visit will be to try to maintain the momentum of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process relaunched at last month's Annapolis conference. A subsidiary theme will be an effort to stiffen the resolve of the US's principal Arab allies in the face of Iran's perceived drive for regional hegemony. His itinerary starts on January 8th in Israel and the West Bank, after which he will visit Kuwait, Bahrain, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. [Emphasis added]
The article makes it quite clear that the outlook on the trip just isn't all that great, which is not too surprising, given the last seven years.
With the possible exception of Iraq, which is showing some signs of improvement after a nightmarish four years, few areas of US policy concern in the Middle East give much cause for encouragement for Mr Bush as he prepares for his trip. The Israel-Palestine question has been hit by the all-too familiar twin blight of Israeli settlement expansion and violence in Gaza; US and French efforts to get a president installed in Lebanon have been stymied by local forces allied to Syria and Iran; Gulf Arab states have been confused by the recent US intelligence estimate that appeared to give Iran a clean bill of health with respect to its nuclear plans; and Egypt is once more bridling at conditions set by Congress on US aid disbursements.
It's pretty obvious that after seven years of disaster after disaster in both the foreign policy and domestic policy arenas, Mr. Bush is looking to salvage some kind of legacy. Unfortunately, he has managed to lose whatever credibility the US has ever had in the Middle East by his spiteful war and his refusal to engage the governments in the area most affected by that war. This is simply a case of too little, too late.
The Annapolis Conference was poorly prepared for and not much was actually accomplished beyond the attempt at bribing the current Palestinian government with international money (and thereby giving Israel the option to ease up on any meaningful negotiations with Hamas, which controls Gaza and was deliberately left off the invitation list). And then there's the matter of Iran (a country whose influence was immeasurably increased by the Iraq debacle).
In the Gulf, Mr Bush will be pressed to clarify US intentions towards Iran in light of the National Intelligence Estimate, which declared that Iran had stopped activities directly related to the development of nuclear missiles, but acknowledged that Iran was still in a position to acquire a nuclear weapons capability between 2010 and 2015. The Gulf Arab states are likely to be relieved that this change in US assumptions appears to render a military strike against Iran improbable, at least in the short term. However, they will be concerned at the inconsistency of the US approach to the issue, and alarmed at the prospect that the US may have conceded that there is little that it can do to stop Iran ultimately securing the capability to deploy nuclear weapons.
While that NIE was a shocker (about which I'll have more to say later today), I think it fair to say that somebody finally figured out that starting another war in the region might not be the best idea at this time, especially since, with the exception of Israel, the rest of the world balked at yet another unilateral move towards war. Once that report was released, however, the Bush administration was put in that uncomfortable space between Iraq and a hard place. Nothing it could do or say in response would make any sense. That's what happens when "diplomacy" is done on the fly, with no rational reasoning or preparation.
And so the president will make his trip, shake hands, look pleased with his welcome (even in the face of what will surely be some massive demonstrations against his very existence), and commit another embarrassing gaffe. Same old same old. And the entire region will be glad to see him go, both this January and next.
The US president, George W Bush, is planning an eight-day visit to the Middle East in early January in a bid to salvage some positive achievements from his administration's largely dismal legacy to the region. The main purpose of the visit will be to try to maintain the momentum of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process relaunched at last month's Annapolis conference. A subsidiary theme will be an effort to stiffen the resolve of the US's principal Arab allies in the face of Iran's perceived drive for regional hegemony. His itinerary starts on January 8th in Israel and the West Bank, after which he will visit Kuwait, Bahrain, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. [Emphasis added]
The article makes it quite clear that the outlook on the trip just isn't all that great, which is not too surprising, given the last seven years.
With the possible exception of Iraq, which is showing some signs of improvement after a nightmarish four years, few areas of US policy concern in the Middle East give much cause for encouragement for Mr Bush as he prepares for his trip. The Israel-Palestine question has been hit by the all-too familiar twin blight of Israeli settlement expansion and violence in Gaza; US and French efforts to get a president installed in Lebanon have been stymied by local forces allied to Syria and Iran; Gulf Arab states have been confused by the recent US intelligence estimate that appeared to give Iran a clean bill of health with respect to its nuclear plans; and Egypt is once more bridling at conditions set by Congress on US aid disbursements.
It's pretty obvious that after seven years of disaster after disaster in both the foreign policy and domestic policy arenas, Mr. Bush is looking to salvage some kind of legacy. Unfortunately, he has managed to lose whatever credibility the US has ever had in the Middle East by his spiteful war and his refusal to engage the governments in the area most affected by that war. This is simply a case of too little, too late.
The Annapolis Conference was poorly prepared for and not much was actually accomplished beyond the attempt at bribing the current Palestinian government with international money (and thereby giving Israel the option to ease up on any meaningful negotiations with Hamas, which controls Gaza and was deliberately left off the invitation list). And then there's the matter of Iran (a country whose influence was immeasurably increased by the Iraq debacle).
In the Gulf, Mr Bush will be pressed to clarify US intentions towards Iran in light of the National Intelligence Estimate, which declared that Iran had stopped activities directly related to the development of nuclear missiles, but acknowledged that Iran was still in a position to acquire a nuclear weapons capability between 2010 and 2015. The Gulf Arab states are likely to be relieved that this change in US assumptions appears to render a military strike against Iran improbable, at least in the short term. However, they will be concerned at the inconsistency of the US approach to the issue, and alarmed at the prospect that the US may have conceded that there is little that it can do to stop Iran ultimately securing the capability to deploy nuclear weapons.
While that NIE was a shocker (about which I'll have more to say later today), I think it fair to say that somebody finally figured out that starting another war in the region might not be the best idea at this time, especially since, with the exception of Israel, the rest of the world balked at yet another unilateral move towards war. Once that report was released, however, the Bush administration was put in that uncomfortable space between Iraq and a hard place. Nothing it could do or say in response would make any sense. That's what happens when "diplomacy" is done on the fly, with no rational reasoning or preparation.
And so the president will make his trip, shake hands, look pleased with his welcome (even in the face of what will surely be some massive demonstrations against his very existence), and commit another embarrassing gaffe. Same old same old. And the entire region will be glad to see him go, both this January and next.
Labels: Foreign Policy, Middle East
posted by Diane at 11:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home