Bush Re-Engages on Middle East Peace-No Thanks to His NSA

by Steve

As a frequent critic of George W. Bush, I am quick to attack him for his overtly political approach to the job and his lies and deceits, which he has made a standard part of his presidential repertoire. Yet I also want to give him his due on his recent efforts to push the Middle East road map, a process that despite his total disengagement for the first two years of his administration, now is reenergized by his direct involvement. And notwithstanding the spin from the White House, any progress at all in this area is a plus for the world, regardless of whether or not Bush gets the credit for it or not.

Time magazine has a good piece today that points out the turning point for Bush’s involvement came as a result of direct appeals from Arab leaders. But these appeals came after Condi Rice had spurned similar appeals from those leaders.

The summits last week also happened because of pressure from Arab leaders. A month after the President's speech, King Abdullah of Jordan and his Foreign Minister, Marwan Muasher, went to Washington to plead with Bush to follow up his words with a plan. Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Adviser, rejected the idea. But in the Oval Office, King Abdullah and Muasher appealed directly to the President. The parties needed a guide, Muasher told Bush, to reach the goals laid out in his speech. "Sounds like a good idea to me," Bush replied. Suddenly the road map was born.

The Time piece also points out that Bush made a commitment that he would work towards peace if others backed him on Iraq.

Bush's conversion has a lot to do with one of his personal canons: keep your word. Last year, as he lobbied European and Arab leaders to join the coalition against Iraq, Bush swore that in return for their support he would dedicate himself to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Aides say Bush believes that without the support of Britain's Tony Blair and the tacit acceptance of Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah, war against Saddam Hussein might not have been possible. "When he needed their help, he made these guys a promise," a senior adviser to the President says. "It sounds like spin, but he takes that stuff seriously."

And lastly, his staff know that just working for peace will pay political dividends for Bush, another acknowledgement that it really is all about politics with these guys, and not so much that it is the right thing to do.

And yet the risks for Bush may be less than they seem to be. "The public has low expectations of success because they know so many U.S. Presidents have tried this before," says a top aide. Bush will get credit from American voters for trying, even if he fails — an important consideration just 17 months before the election.

So after saying such direct involvement by a president wasn’t a good idea, when he and his staff attacked Clinton for doing so, Bush promised exactly the same thing if others would back his Iraq invasion. And he did it after his vaunted National Security Advisor (NSA) said no, because he knew he would get political points for even trying.

Well, the leopard doesn’t change his spots, but again if it works, I will be the first to say “good job.” No thanks to his twin-mirrored NSA, though.