It's the calls Bush didn't or couldn't make that might mean the difference

[bigtree]

The White House: The Legacy on the Line
The showdown in the Middle East provides the toughest test yet of the pillars of President Bush's foreign policy.

By Michael Hirsh
Newsweek
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13881743/site/newsweek/

July 24, 2006 issue - The Bush team didn't see this one coming. Maybe it was simply that too many other volcanoes were erupting at the same time. Iraq was tipping closer to civil war, Iran was getting more brazen by the day and North Korea's missiles were roiling East Asia. The president, meanwhile, was preoccupied with what would likely be a testy G8 summit hosted by Russian President Vladimir Putin. True, the two top U.S. Mideast envoys—David Welch and Elliott Abrams—were in the region when hostilities began. But they had been reassured by Lebanese contacts that Hassan Nasrallah, the Hizbullah leader, didn't plan to "stir things up" while Hamas and Israel contended over a kidnapped Israeli corporal, according to a senior U.S. diplomat who would divulge the details only if he remained anonymous. "You had six and a half years of, if not calm, basically a stable deterrence between Hizbullah and Israel," the official told NEWSWEEK. "I did not expect this at all."

If so, he was badly misled, and so was the president—which is one reason Iran and Syria were quickly suspected of acting as outside agitators. En route to Russia, Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reacted swiftly to contain the war, although they actively backed Israel's right to continue its offensive against Hizbullah. The president, aboard Air Force One, made a round of calls to Arab allies, mainly Egypt and Jordan, pleading the case that Hizbullah's breach of the border was a clear violation of international law. Bush wanted the Arab leaders to know that he was urging Israel to avoid any action that would topple the Lebanese government—and allow Syria to take back control of its neighbor. But in return he urged them to pressure Hizbullah at an emergency Arab League summit in Cairo. In an exclusive interview with NEWSWEEK, Bush said he told the Arab leaders: "Let's make sure this meeting is not the usual condemnation of Israel, because if that's the case it obscures the real culprit"—Hizbullah and Hamas.

To Bush's delight, key U.S. allies offered support. The Saudis issued a statement implicitly blaming Hizbullah for the hostilities, saying "it is necessary to make a distinction between legitimate resistance and irresponsible adventurism adopted by certain elements within the state." Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah II, in Cairo, echoed that view in a joint statement.

In the longer run, however, it is the calls Bush didn't—or couldn't—make that might mean the difference in containing this new Mideast conflict. As part of his policy of isolating terror-supporting groups and nations, the Bush administration has no relationship with any of the other parties at war or the states behind them. That apparently means no dialogue, even through back channels, with Iran, Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas. Senior U.S. officials also said Bush and Rice had no intention of appointing a special envoy at this time. (Welch, having conducted all-day meetings with Israeli officials and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, took off on a previously scheduled trip to Libya over the weekend.) As a result, the president must watch and hope while his whole Mideast legacy—his goal of transforming a region that is the primary source for Islamist terrorism—stands at risk. Also on the line is his strategy of isolating Iran, as tensions mounted between Washington and Europe over Israel's action. "Usually in the past, whenever there was a crisis in the Mideast, the U.S. would immediately dispatch a high-level envoy," said Imad Moustapha, the Syrian ambassador to Washington, confirming that his government had received no U.S. contacts except a request for visas for Americans fleeing Lebanon to Damascus. "This time the only thing the United States is doing is blaming parties, assigning responsibility. There's nothing else."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13881743/site/newsweek/

[warrens]

1. If you could mine incompetence and burn it for fuel

We'd never have to worry about the price of oil again. Just keep these bozos in power and live in luxury. Of course, they'd destroy the world, but we'd have fewer carbon dioxide emissions, just the stink of abject failure.

[bigtree]

2. Of course, they never intended to succeed

Chaos serves in Iraq and Afghanistan serves their intention to stay indefinitely. It's just fine with them that Hizbollah has given them an excuse to dismantle the peace process since democracy brought Israel Hamas. They only care about their narrow imperious, industry interests. The rest of what they do is fumble and deflect like a liar caught in an obvious lie. All of their talk is just to mislead.