by Trudy Rubin
With competing interests even within the administration, when it comes
to foreign policy, it's not yet clear who will
be calling the tune.
Much has been made of President Bush's decision to set up a corporate-style
government with a bunch of
strong-minded, outspoken Cabinet secretaries.
The president is the CEO, Dick Cheney is his COO and -- once the policy
line has been thrashed out --
communications director Karen Hughes keeps the team on message. At
least, she does when it comes to domestic
policy (Christie Whitman and Paul O'Neill learned that lesson on carbon-dioxide
emissions).
But when it comes to foreign policy, it's not yet clear who will be calling the tune.
Six weeks into the administration there appear to be two foreign policy
teams. Team A (read no significance into
the lettering) is headed by Secretary of State Colin Powell, a moderate
who is eager to promote diplomacy over
confrontation.
Team B is run by Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul
Wolfowitz (with strong support from
conservatives in Congress). They are keen to advertise America's toughness.
The teams are competing to define policy on Iraq and toward Europe and
Russia. Their differences also will affect
the administration's first major foreign-policy decision -- whether
to make arms sales to Taiwan over China's
fierce opposition.
What's so strange is not the intra-administration hassles -- every presidency
has them -- but that the jousting is
occurring at such a high level. This isn't Nixon's Henry Kissinger
walking all over an unwitting William Rogers. This is
a war of competing giants: a general with public icon status and superb
media skills vs. a tough Republican
stalwart with tight links to Cheney.
The conflict has erupted long before the Bush team has completed its
much touted foreign-policy review. Few
members of the foreign policy team are yet in place, and no one's sure
what role will be played by Cheney -- or
even national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.
So foreign governments are trying to keep scorecards. Some(notably the
Europeans) make no secret that they
hope Powell will triumph, and all are struggling to decipher the mechanics
of Bush's foreign policy-making. They
have my sympathy. Take a look at some of the competing moves by Team
A and Team B.
On Iraq. Powell tours the Middle East and pushes to revamp eroding sanctions
against Saddam Hussein, while
downplaying military action. But Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz want Saddam's
ouster, via arming Iraqi opposition
groups that State thinks are hopeless. Conservative media label
Powell soft on Saddam, while Wolfowitz hints at
confirmation hearings that rollback policy will revive.
On Europe. Rumsfeld goes to Munich and tells the Europeans U.S. plans
for missile defenses are a done deal,
whether or not they like it. Powell goes to Brussels and soothes the
Europeans, stressing Washington will consult
fully with them and Russia on missile defenses and doesn't mind a European
military force within NATO. Then
Rumsfeld proclaims -- to Britain's Sunday Telegraph -- that the Euroforce
could endanger NATO, and that U.S.
missile defenses won't be constrained by previous arms control treaties
with Russia.
On China and Taiwan. Here is the perfect example of how conservative-moderate
push-pull in foreign policy can
cause real damage before that policy is even fleshed out. U.S. policy
toward Taiwan -- a democratic island society
that China claims as a renegade province -- is crucial to our entire
relationship with China. We are committed to a
``one China'' policy, meaning no independent Taiwan, but also to the
premise that China may not resolve Taiwan's
future by force.
China, irrationally fearful that Taiwan may declare independence, has
based an arsenal of 250 missiles on the
mainland opposite the island. Conservatives want to sell Taiwan sophisticated
destroyers with Aegis radar
systems this spring, which could become part of a U.S. regional missile-defense
system to protect against China. A
new Bush administration has the chance to test China, to propose a
trade-off. If Beijing lowers the number of
missiles, and restarts talks with Taiwan, we hold off on selling Aegis
destroyers (which won't be ready for several
years anyway).
But conservatives, a la Rumsfeld, want to talk tough now, even if this
prods China into hostile reaction. Moderates, a
la Powell, want to link Taiwan to a broader, rethought China policy,
giving China a chance to respond. Ditto policy in
Europe, and the Middle East.
Someone in the White House has to decide soon which team gets the nod, or how to make two teams into one.
"Who's in Charge Here?" was published in St. Paul's Pioneer Press on March 27th, 2001