Robert Scheer on Bush's G8 Misadventure

The G8 meeting was an historic event and not for reasons Bush was hoping for. It's hard to say what it means when the Russians and Chinese are the adults in the room. Just saying it is sobering. Here's an article from Truthout by Robert Scheer:

Bombs were exploding and innocents dying, from Beirut to Haifa to Baghdad, and yet George Bush managed to pose for yet another photo op, smiling as he gave the thumbs up at the close of the G8 summit. Thanks to an unsuspected open mic, however, we could also glimpse the mindset of a leader unaccountably pleased with his ignorance of the world.

(snip)

But should we be surprised at Bush's poor grasp of the world he supposedly leads? After all, the blundering of the Bush administration has seriously undermined secular politics in the Mideast and boosted the religious zealots of groups like Hezbollah to positions of preeminence throughout the region, from savagely violent Iraq to the beleaguered West Bank and Gaza.

But what is truly "ironic" is that the Bush administration, having overstretched our militarily and generated no foreign policy ideas beyond the willy-nilly "projection" of military force, has become a helpless bystander as the entire region threatens to burn.

(snip)

Where Albright was critical of the "disaster" in Iraq for distracting from the dormant Mideast peace process, Rice was shrilly defensive.

"For the last 60 years, American administrations of both stripe - Democrat, Republican - traded what they thought was security and stability and turned a blind eye to the absence of democratic forces, to the absence of pluralism in the region," she said Sunday. "That policy has changed."

While this is certainly a dramatic sound bite, the words have no logical meaning: The U.S. continues to embrace the dictatorships of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, as has been the case for sixty years. In fact, Bush has added Libya to the "approved" list.

As long as Condi Rice is forced to tell the world pretty much what Bush wants to hear (or perhaps it's Karl Rove?), our foreign policy will continue to be crippled even if there has been a change of sorts in policy in the past few months (or nonaction as some acute observers have noted). Rice is supposedly intelligent. Surely, she doesn't believe her own nonsense, does she? In any case, it seems to me that the Bush administration has gotten good at fostering chaos, not fostering democracy.

Trudy Rubin of the Philadelphia Inquirer undoubtedly understands the Middle East a great deal better than Condi Rice and has an article based on facts rather than Republican slogans that summarizes the unpleasant reality of our current foreign policy:

The president was correct in citing Syria (while oddly omitting Iran) as part of the problem. I doubt Hezbollah would have started this crisis without a green light from both of its sponsors, who supply it with funds and missiles. But Bush's words revealed how little influence the United States has in this crisis. And without strong U.S. intervention, it's hard to see who has the power to bring about an acceptable cease-fire.

Under Presidents Reagan, Bush père or Clinton, the United States would have dispatched a top-level emissary to visit Israel and the relevant Arab capitals to stop the fighting. These days, while the United States can exert strong influence (if it chooses) in Jerusalem, it has no leverage with the other capitals that matter: Damascus and Tehran.

For all its strength, the United States is no longer the predominant player it once was in the Middle East.

Washington has had no diplomatic relations with Iran for decades and no ambassador in Syria since early 2005. (The administration expected the overthrow of Saddam Hussein to precipitate "regime change" in Syria and Iran. Some Bush officials still nourish unrealistic hopes these regimes will implode in the near term.) That gives the Syrians and Iranians incentive to stir up trouble in Lebanon and elsewhere.

In recent years, U.S. diplomacy in the region has been notable for its absence. Preoccupied with Iraq, the United States pretty much bowed out of efforts to restart the Mideast peace process.

(snip)

Some argue that Syria and Iran should be bombed. Neither Israel nor the Bush team seems inclined in that direction, for good reason.

But the crucial Mideast mediating role once played by the United States has atrophied. Bush can't get on the phone with the Syrian president and "make something happen," nor can Condoleezza Rice visit the capitals that matter.

No wonder a frustrated president was wishing Kofi Annan could save the day.

For decades, our country has moved forward under Democrats or Republicans. Occassionally there have been setbacks under one party or the other. Under President George W. Bush, our country is seriously moving backwards. That is not acceptable.