SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mannie who wrote (4023)8/7/2002 7:01:01 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Colin Powell: leading without being bossy

By Tom Plate
Syndicated columnist
Wednesday, August 07, 2002 - 12:00 a.m. Pacific



LOS ANGELES — The job of U.S. secretary of state requires skating on ice — sometimes thin — and dodging diplomatic bullets — even if they later are found to be blanks. From this standpoint, could the United States do any better than Colin Powell?

The former four-star general was on the road last week yet again. It was an eight-day, eight-country swing through much of South and Southeast Asia that he'll probably remember as one of his finer stretches in office.

It started bumpily enough, though, in tension-filled South Asia, where India did not take kindly to his advice about "internationalizing" coming elections in disputed Kashmir and Jammu — and in Pakistan, which seemed irritated by the brevity of his visit there (five hours and on to Thailand). But Powell was, in public at least, unruffled about the Indian rebuff. For in the court of public opinion, he had made his point: On both sides of the South Asian divide, improvement is needed: India has to practice democracy more, and Pakistan should sponsor terrorism less.

Then Powell went on to Brunei, site of a foreign-minister-level meeting hosted by the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations, where he produced winners. Not unexpectedly but significantly, one of the three charter members of President George W. Bush's "axis of evil" showed up. You never know what the North Koreans will do. But when Powell made himself available for a quick chat, North Korea's foreign minister took the opportunity.

The two had an "unplanned" get-together. It turned out to be the highest-level contact between Pyongyang and Washington — despite its brief, 15-minute duration — since the Bush administration took office. The instant effect was to resurrect South Korean President Kim Dae Jung's preternaturally wise but much-maligned "sunshine policy" of positive diplomacy with the North.

All week, Powell was the main-man-in-motion, also touching down for talks in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Singapore, Jakarta and Manila.

Even more than the president of the United States, the secretary of state in this interdependent age has to be a traveling man or woman. The job doesn't need so much a glad-handing politician as it does a credible vicar and soft-spoken preacher for our nation's foreign policy who doesn't cause an otherwise loyal ally's hair to stand on end or prompt an edgy foe to pump up the weapons budget.

Fortunately, Powell is no blunderbuss. He has been largely careful, as to some extent has been his counterpart at the Defense Department, Donald Rumsfeld, to recognize that the American way is not necessarily the only good way to go. And so, after helping put together a pair of anti-terror pacts with ASEAN in Brunei last week, he went out of his way to avoid the usual American rah-rah triumphalism.

Indeed, in Singapore, with Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong looking on approvingly, he pointedly sought to make the reassuring point that the United States was not about to force anti-terror troops down the throats of Asian governments. And any such deployments would be carefully crafted to fit into the local culture and customs, rather than antagonizing or even rolling over them.

Said Powell: "That's the way we go about these missions — try not to be heavy-handed, try to go to help."

With this, Powell in effect joined hands with a recent predecessor, Warren Christopher, Clinton's first secretary of state — also viewed as a dove but in fact a call-'em-as-I-see-'em pragmatist. In a wide-ranging speech earlier this year at UCLA, Christopher emphasized the urgent need for America to keep its ego under control if it wished to maximize its diplomatic effectiveness.

"While the United States might often be the architect of an initiative," he said of the best approach, "other nations would join in the planning and construction, their views would have weight, and their interests would be respected. We might be the leader but not the boss."

To be sure, Powell is not the boss and he knows who is. But he is the leader of the kinder, gentler American image abroad.

Without him, the Bush administration risks losing ground internationally by seeming to want to grab too much of it; with him, it loses no ground at all simply by letting him lead.
______________________________________

Tom Plate is a UCLA professor and founder of the Asia Pacific Media Network (www.asiamedia.ucla.edu). His column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times.

Copyright © 2002 The Seattle Times Company

seattletimes.nwsource.com



To: Mannie who wrote (4023)8/7/2002 7:46:15 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Detailed war plan handed to Bush

UN critic says attack decision has been made
Duncan Campbell in Los Angeles
The Guardian
Wednesday August 7, 2002

General Tommy Franks, who would lead a US military action in Iraq, has presented President George Bush with refinements of a plan for attack. Gen Franks, who led the US military operation in Afghanistan, presented the latest version and its potential consequences to the White House on Monday.

"This is deadly serious stuff," the former UN chief weapons inspector Scott Ritter, an outspoken critic of the war plans, said yesterday. "He is not briefing about a cricket match. He is briefing about war options."

Mr Ritter, a marine corps veteran and Republican, said he was in no doubt that the Bush administration was committed to military action. "I keep hearing from people that they are bluffing. They are not bluffing. The Bush administration is going to go to war come hell or high water. The decision has been made."

Mr Ritter, the author of Endgame: Solving the Iraqi Problem Once and For All, said that military units were being mobilised, actions that had not been taken since the Gulf war. Gen Franks was not presenting a plan, as was being reported, but "refinements" to the existing plan.

The Bush administration continued to dismiss offers from Iraq for UN inspectors to return. The defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, mocked the idea of US congressmen visiting the country for a three weeks with experts of their choice.

"I can't think of anything funnier than a handful of congressmen walking around," said Mr Rumsfeld. "They'd have to be there for the next 50 years trying to find something. It's a joke."

The US war plan is believed to involve the deployment of around 50,000 troops in initial stages. Many US politicians believe that as many as 250,000 troops might eventually be needed. Few politicians are prepared to voice scepticism about a war on Iraq.

"This isn't American democracy in action," said Mr Ritter. "It's the failure of American democracy. Before we go to war with Iraq, we must be able to determine that Iraq poses a threat to the national security of the US. Such a determination must be backed up with substantive fact. I believe that Iraq does not pose a threat to the US worthy of war. This conclusion is shared by many senior military officers."

guardian.co.uk