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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (24662)1/16/2004 10:37:35 AM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 793717
 
Bremer's U.N. Lifeline

By David Ignatius
Friday, January 16, 2004; Page A19

BAGHDAD -- Let's try to read the mind of America's proconsul here in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer -- the man whose crisp coat-and-tie style has done more to advance the preppie look than anyone since Jay Gatsby.



Bremer is preparing for a crucial meeting in New York on Monday with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. The irony is that Bremer will be asking the United Nations, in effect, to provide political legitimacy for his plan to delay elections until after the planned July 1 handover of sovereignty to Iraq.

Bremer's problem is that America's indispensable ally in Iraq -- the Shiite Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani -- isn't budging in his demand that elections precede the handover of sovereignty. In part it's a power grab by Sistani, who knows these elections will lock in the power of Iraq's Shiite majority.

Bremer wants Annan to send a fact-finding team to Iraq to confirm that quick elections are unfeasible. Annan has already sent a letter advising against a quick poll. It was delivered to Sistani this week by Iraq's current interim president, Adnan Pachachi, but it wasn't enough. The hope is that Sistani will find it easier to accept the conclusions of a U.N. team than to accede to American occupiers.

So things have come full circle in Iraq: After bypassing the United Nations on its rush into Iraq, the Bush administration now realizes that it needs Annan's help in getting out.

Bremer hopes the Monday meeting will produce a process for bringing the international organization back into Iraq. The fact-finding team will buy time until the July 1 transfer -- assuming Sistani goes along. Once Iraq regains its sovereignty, the United Nations can then help write election laws, compile reliable voter rolls, appoint an election commission and write a new constitution.

The United States can help in these nation-building tasks. But they will be easier for Iraqis to swallow with a U.N. seal of approval -- which should take the sting out of occupation. Bremer knows that premature elections could be disastrous -- exacerbating Sunni Muslim fears that the Shiite majority will abuse its power just as the Sunnis did when Saddam Hussein was in control.

So how did the savvy Bremer misread Sistani's insistence on elections when he announced the U.S. transition plan Nov. 15? The answer seems to be botched communication, in which an emissary from the Governing Council either misstated Bremer's plan to delay elections or misunderstood Sistani's response.

Bremer has what must be the hardest and most dangerous job in the world. With his striped "rep" ties, well-creased trousers and blue blazer, Bremer has the air of a man born to rule, or at least temporarily administer. But in light of the Sistani problem, it may help to think of Bremer not as a proconsul but as a bankruptcy trustee.

Bremer's bankrupt Iraq has three main political creditors: the Shiites, the Kurds and the Sunnis. If any one of them presses for unilateral advantage -- threatens to "call its loans," so to speak -- the fragile structure of the new Iraq might crumble. As in a bankruptcy, the creditors can achieve their goals only if they patiently forbear -- and let the trustee do his job of putting the enterprise back together.

Unfortunately, all three Iraqi factions are going for broke -- trying to lock in their gains now, even if that has the effect of destroying their common venture. Sistani's push for quick elections is certainly that. So is the recent demand by Kurds to keep their quasi-autonomous zone in the north and add to it areas that have a majority Kurdish population, possibly including oil-rich Kirkuk. And so, too, is the armed insurgency in the Sunni Triangle.

So what can Bremer do to bring Iraq out of bankruptcy and back to some sort of political solvency?

The answer is that, like any trustee, he must believe that his creditors are rational. Bremer knows Iraqis want American occupation to end. But he also knows that Iraqis fear that their country is drifting toward civil war. His polls tell him 57 percent of Iraqis would feel less safe if American troops pulled out tomorrow. In Baghdad, that figure is 65 percent; in Basra, it's 67 percent.

Bremer has to believe in Iraqi realpolitik -- in a rationality that will transcend the go-for-broke demands of ethnic and religious dogmatists. His best hope is that when he departs next July, he will have left behind a country that, although fragile and untidy, at least has a chance of becoming a democracy and avoiding a civil war.

To succeed, Bremer and his colleagues must engage in some realpolitik of their own -- by embracing the United Nations as a full partner in rebuilding Iraq.

">davidignatius@washpost.com



To: Lane3 who wrote (24662)1/16/2004 2:27:16 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793717
 
Ya gotta have a "Chris LeHane." The Times "Front Paged" this.

Chris understands the essential dynamic of politics, which is punch or be punched,"

January 16, 2004
Clark's Rivals Irked by Campaign Aide's Tactics
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

MANCHESTER, N.H., Jan. 12 — The documents — those nasty tidbits that campaigns euphemistically call "opposition research" — are flying in the scrappy final days of the Democratic contests here and in Iowa. At the center of the maelstrom, Democrats say, is a 36-year-old aide to Gen. Wesley K. Clark, a frenetic, colorful and, some contend, devious communications strategist named Chris Lehane.

Every campaign has people behind the scenes feeding unflattering facts about opponents to the press. But Mr. Lehane — a veteran of Al Gore's 2000 campaign and the Clinton White House, where his specialty was blunting queries from investigative reporters — is such a shrewd practitioner of what one admiring strategist called "the political black arts" that lately, when a negative story appears, rivals point to him.

"He can spread both joy and pain," said Donna Brazile, who managed Mr. Gore's campaign and calls herself a fan of Mr. Lehane. "It's important to know what side you're on when Chris Lehane is coming at you."

Now, Mr. Lehane has become a target in a fight among Democrats about whether opposition research is going too far. With General Clark rising in the polls in New Hampshire and Howard Dean facing a spate of negative news reports, from stories about stock he sold as Vermont's governor to remarks maligning the Iowa caucuses, many Democrats are convinced they see the invisible hand of Chris Lehane.

"He's doing what he does, and what he learned quite well in war rooms and hard-fought campaigns," said one Democrat who works for a rival campaign. "It's just that right now, he's doing it inside the family, as opposed to across the fence. And so it's received differently. He's spilling blood in our house."

Mr. Lehane, who is ordinarily so accessible that some reporters complain they cannot get rid of him, declined an interview for this article, insisting he wanted the focus to be on General Clark, not him. But it is clear that he has emerged as General Clark's secret weapon.

This week, while his candidate was in New Hampshire, sticking to his positive message and trying to stay above the fray, Mr. Lehane (pronounced luh-HAIN) hovered in the background, constantly working his cellphone and his BlackBerry pager, putting out the message that while his candidate was moving up, others were slipping.

On Monday morning at 9, reporters traveling with General Clark were clustered in a hotel lobby here when Mr. Lehane blew in, carrying an oversize cup of coffee from Dunkin' Donuts and wearing his trademark mischievous look.

"So you heard Kerry's attacking us," he said, referring to Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts — a candidate he advised last year.

Minutes later, Mr. Lehane produced two documents: a flattering remark Mr. Kerry made about General Clark, and a not-so-flattering synopsis of a 1996 Boston Globe article that said Mr. Kerry had stayed rent-free at the home of a lobbyist. All this transpired two hours before the Kerry camp said a single word.

Of course, there are times when the Clark campaign is on the other end of opposition research, as happened this week, when the general faced questions about a remark he made in 2002 suggesting there was a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda — a statement that contradicts his current position. But those who know Mr. Lehane say that in these battles, he more often than not wins.

"Chris understands the essential dynamic of politics, which is punch or be punched," said Jim Jordan, Mr. Kerry's former campaign manager.

A graduate of Harvard Law School who grew up in a middle-class family in Maine, Mr. Lehane, who signed on with General Clark in October, exudes a kind of joy about politics that his co-workers find infectious. He loves practical jokes, and delights in swiping his colleagues' BlackBerry pagers and sending out ridiculous e-mail messages under their names. When General Clark visited a yogurt factory, Mr. Lehane was given a container of fake yogurt that looked as if it had spilled. He carried it with him all day, amusing himself by tossing it on people and announcing, "Hey, man, you're spilling!"

But beneath the humor is an extremely aggressive strategist whom Mr. Jordan describes as "a master of the political hand-to-hand." Those who know Mr. Lehane say his skill lies in his intricate understanding of how news organizations work, and in his uncanny ability to play one reporter off another.

In 2000, researchers for the Gore campaign uncovered a Bush advertisement that, for one-thirtieth of a second, flashed the word "rats" on the screen. Michael Feldman, then a senior adviser to Mr. Gore, recalls how Mr. Lehane went about offering the story, first to The New York Times and then to the networks:

"Between 11 and midnight, Chris invited, one at a time, the network correspondents and their off-air producers up to a hotel room where we were staying, to play the ad. He had this whole thing choreographed, like they were getting something very exclusive. So when the story broke, it broke hard and it dominated several news cycles."

Mr. Feldman, for one, said spreading opposition research might be better for the Democrats "than to leave all of that information in the hands of the Bush campaign and the Republican National Committee for them to use next fall."

With his snappy quotations and his penchant for alliteration, Mr. Lehane, his associates say, is both an effective spokesman and an effective tutor for General Clark, who has never run for office. After distributing the Kerry documents, Mr. Lehane declared repeatedly that "attack is the sincerest form of flattery" in politics. An hour or so later, General Clark used the same line.

"Once you know where you want to take a message, Chris is very smart about how to put your best foot forward," said Geoff Garin, General Clark's pollster.

One friend, who suspects Mr. Lehane in the recent stories about Dr. Dean, said: "Like criminals, most good political operatives have certain M.O.'s. Chris's is fairly recognizable. He's very aggressive and he's very thorough and very good at getting reporters what they need to do a hatchet job on your opponent."

This week, tensions over Mr. Lehane burst into prime time, when Steve McMahon, a consultant for Dr. Dean's campaign, erupted in frustration at Mr. Lehane on the MSNBC program "Hardball." Mr. Lehane casually mentioned a four-year-old videotape that surfaced last week, showing Dr. Dean criticizing the Iowa caucuses as "dominated by special interests" — a definite no-no for a candidate courting Iowa voters. Clearly irritated, Mr. McMahon interrupted him.

"You know about it," Mr. McMahon said. "It came from you."

"That tape did not come from me," Mr. Lehane shot back.

Mr. McMahon, insisting he was bound by a confidential source, said later that he could not "provide proof." But he did say he wanted to put Mr. Lehane on notice. "I'm reacting to a lot of evidence that comes over the transom," he said, "and I wanted to sort of fire a shot at him and let him know that when he's doing this stuff, we hear about it."

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company