Posted on 06/21/2006 3:33:06 PM PDT by naturalman1975
For Washington insiders, the US-Australia alliance is one of the great successes of the Bush presidency's troubled foreign policy, writes Greg Sheridan
RICH Armitage, the former US deputy secretary of state, lists four important accomplishments for US foreign policy under George W. Bush.
The first is the US-Australia alliance. It has grown immeasurably closer under Bush and John Howard. The Australian Prime Minister, Armitage says, got everything he wanted from the alliance and the Americans are certainly happy with what they got from it.
And Howard is one of relatively few democratic political leaders who has not suffered at all politically from his association with Bush.
"Howard knows his own mind and people admire that," Armitage says. "And he has an unerring sense of timing. He sits back and lets others make mistakes and then he snaps the trap shut."
Armitage was personally responsible for the development of the Trilateral Security Dialogue between the US, Japan and Australia and regards it as a vitally important new piece of regional architecture.
"For the US, it forces us to look at Asia seriously once a year," he says. "For Australia, it allows you to punch way above your weight because you have the full attention of the two biggest economies in the world."
I had a long discussion with Armitage this week in his Washington office. He was the deputy secretary of state for the first four years of Bush's presidency.
He then left government service because he would not stay in an administration that got rid of former secretary of state Colin Powell but kept Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
According to Washington rumour, Armitage was offered three separate positions in the second Bush administration. He could have become the first director of national intelligence, the newly created top position in the intelligence system. He could have become director of the CIA or head of the Department of Homeland Security.
In all likelihood, should a Republican win the presidency in 2008, Armitage would again be a central player in US foreign policy.
These days he is open in expressing his criticisms of US policy. He is gloomy about the situation in Iraq, as outlined in The Australian's news pages yesterday, though he is by no means defeatist.
It's instructive that the other three developments Armitage regards as big achievements for Bush's foreign policy are all centred in Asia.
When Armitage left Bush's team, Washington lost much of its Asian expertise. However, his successor, Bob Zoellick, also had substantial Asian experience and took the running on US-China policy. With Zoellick now also announcing his departure this week, the administration is even more bereft of Asia hands.
But back to the achievement list.
Achievement No.2 is the US relationship with Japan. Japan's Prime Minister, Junichiro Koizumi, as with Howard, prospered politically after fully backing Bush in Iraq and in the war on terror generally. Tokyo and Washington have re-defined their alliance, making it both more reciprocal and global.
Success No.3 is the relationship with China. Many analysts in the early days of the Bush administration saw likely conflict between Washington and Beijing.
Instead, tensions have been defused, co-operation in numerous fields pursued, trade expanded and a general atmosphere of calm maintained, although the US mood towards China may be souring.
And achievement No.4 is the new relationship with India. This culminated in a revolutionary nuclear deal earlier this year in which the US undertakes to provide India with nuclear technology and fuel, while India puts most of its nuclear energy program under international supervision. Because India would keep its nuclear weapons, this deal would require fundamental revision of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
As a result, it's a highly contentious deal but Armitage confidently predicts it will be passed by Congress.
This is a view I hear all over Washington. The new US-India strategic engagement may be one of the most important developments of our time. Serious Washington analysts believe the India relationship could be the US's most important within five years.
Armitage supported military intervention in Iraq but is now outspoken about how he and Powell wanted it done very differently, including the use of a far larger number of troops.
He believes the US army is altogether too small and that Rumsfeld's obsession with a technological transformation of the military has led to a dangerous imbalance in US force structure.
"One of the key tenets of warfare has not changed," he says. "Only a soldier with a gun can hold ground, only a soldier with a bayonet can bend an enemy to your will."
There are situations, Armitage says, that you cannot control from 5000m or from offshore. You need soldiers on the ground.
Armitage is also outspoken about the things he believes damage America's standing. He said in a recent interview when asked about Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo: "I think they're terrible. I think they're a blot on our national character. I'd close Guantanamo tomorrow; Abu Ghraib was another blot on our character. It says a terrible thing about us and I'm ashamed of it.
"Are we harmed indelibly and for all time by it? No, we're not. But we ought to correct these aberrations that don't speak or don't prop up our national values."
Armitage's tough-minded honesty is part of the US's resilience. David Brooks argued in The New York Times this week that the US still has a good chance in Iraq because of four factors - US troop morale is high, Iraqi forces are increasingly capable, the Iraqi Government has finally come together and the Iraqi people are not irreparably divided.
America's great strength is its problem-solving culture. A lot of the best minds are hard at work on the problems of Iraq.
"troubled foreign policy" how so? (I didnt much care for that biased observation.) Seems W has had a good approach...one issue illegal immigration dissenters aside...
As in there's a lot of other countries that have a problem with what the US is doing. That's not something I think the US should particularly care about, but it is a real issue, and I'm pretty sure that's what Sheridan is talking about - he's actually one of more pro-US columnists in Australia, and admires the stance the US has taken, but it has created issues for the US in terms of foreign perceptions.
But that doesnt make the implication of this journalists assertion true, which is my problem with misleading rhetorical devices used in many biased articles....but, I know this guy is pro American in his stance...I just wish he'd avoid writing in such a misleading manner...
Better to write..."Bush's foreign policy, which often troubles his political foes, has had many great achievements."
The problem with the way this article begins is...it asserts Bush's foreign policy is flawed...better to nip that in the bud.
Thanks,
In Hoc.
This in not purely an opinion piece - it's a piece based on Sheridan's interview with Richard Armitage. His terminology is based on what Armitage said - he really can't go around changing terminology from that which was used in the interview.
"As in there's a lot of other countries that have a problem with what the US is doing." Most of them have experienced regime change at the hands of their voters, though.
I doubt Dick Armitage made that statement.
I got the impression that is Sheridan's lead in...and narrative of his own.
Well, you might find yourself rather surprised by what Armitage said if the whole interview becomes public - not sure how much of it has been released yet.
HAHAHAHAHAH...you're right, you never know.
Cheers!
I've seen some edited extracts - I work next to the Asia Centre at my university and know some people who work in there, and one of them has the interview and has taken great delight in sending me snippets that he thinks will annoy me - he and I don't see eye politically, and he seems to think Armitage is moving over to his side.
While I doubt that (I think he's ignoring context - it's happened in the past), some of the comments have surprised me a bit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.