Saturday, August 27, 2005

Well, Bush is pretty clear about it

Yesterday there was a lot of back and forth, both here and elsewhere, about what Secretary Rice may or may not have said and may or may not have meant about whether the Palestinians need to take the next step (or a next step) in response to the unilateral Israeli move of leaving Gaza.

As I wrote in one of my comments, reasonable people can certainly differ on what Ms. Rice said or meant. The question of whether the Times "Dowdified" her quote (and I continue to think there was a bit of that going on) is a side issue to the more pressing question of what it was that Rice actually meant.

But today President Bush has been quite clear on the subject. Reuter's reports (via LGF), that Bush, in his radio address:

...put pressure on the Palestinians on Saturday to respond to the Israeli pullout from Gaza and portions of the West Bank by cracking down on terrorism..."Now that Israel has withdrawn, the way forward is clear. The Palestinians must show the world that they will fight terrorism and govern in a peaceful way," Bush said.

So it seems that Bush--at least for today--is placing the ball in the Palestinian court. He seems to be demanding the quid pro quo about which Rice was somewhat equivocal.

As for Rice's previous remarks, and their correct interpretation? It's a bit like reading tea leaves, and there are quite a few possibilities. Either Judith of Kesher Talk is correct, and Rice is playing "bad cop" to Bush's "good cop," or Rice and Bush are not in agreement on this, or Rice is on the same page as Bush and has been misinterpreted by the NY Times, or the whole thing is in a state of flux and even Bush and Rice don't quite know what her position is.

Whatever Bush or Rice say, I would be extremely surprised if the Palestinians actually followed through with positive action. And if that doesn't happen, it's all "mere rhetoric." But rhetoric still matters somewhat, because it sets the tone of the policy expectations for the region.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. The US can't force the Palestinians to abandon terrorism and hatred as a way of life. But we can stop rewarding it or ignoring it, and this type of statement from Bush (if he keeps at it), is at least the equivalent of "leading the horse to water." The rest is up to the horse.

I can only hope that the administration gets clear and remains clear on this score. And even if its a game of "good cop, bad cop," each cop should aim to be consistent about his/her message.

[ADDENDUM: By the way, I was pretty careful about this one. I didn't take Reuters' word for it; I went to the actual text of Bush's radio address to check up on them. They passsed with flying colors; he said what they said he said. Congratulations, Reuters!]

7 Comments:

At 11:59 AM, August 27, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regarding your addendum: That's what it's going to take in the future, checking the original sources. Now that we have the ability to do that more and more and now that we know we have serious reason to doubt the media middlemen at times, the days of taking their word for it are fading away. They can tell me their version of things but they better provide a way for me to read it myself before I'll accept it wholeheartedly.

 
At 12:18 PM, August 27, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Whatever Bush or Rice say, I would be extremely surprised if the Palestinians actually followed through with positive action.”

I would be utterly stunned if the Palestinians lived up to their part of the bargain. This seems unlikely because the militants dominate their society. The moderates have been effectively intimidated. No, I believe in the Wall. This prevents the Palestinians from doing much damage. Eventually the Palestinians will be out of sight--and out of mind. The hell with them. They have made their bed and must sleep in it.

 
At 1:50 PM, August 27, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

anonymous said re checking original sources:

Now that we have the ability to do that more and more and now that we know we have serious reason to doubt the media middlemen at times, the days of taking their word for it are fading away.

I assume you would also include bloggers in your "media middlemen" statement?

Seems to me a healthy skepticism should apply to all media, not just the "MSM". Because if you're going to build a case against something, you want it to be a solid one.

 
At 1:55 PM, August 27, 2005, Blogger Kalroy said...

Sorta sad that Reuters needs to be fact-checked. And yes, I agree that Reuters and the AP and the NYT et al have given people ample reason to suspect the veracity of their reporting.

Sad and unfortunate state of affairs. Unfortunate for us, that is.

Kalroy

 
At 11:27 PM, August 27, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

*sigh*...

 
At 3:18 PM, August 28, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks Mikey! : )

 
At 3:41 PM, August 28, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here we go again.
The Sunday talking heads tell us again that the Bush administration is again on yet another offensive to remind the American people exactly why we are fighting in Iraq.
Why are they always doing this. It was the same when Bush ran against Kerry, and that denizen of courage Michael Moore. Now it is against Cindy Sheehan.
Why do the leaders of the Republican Party continue to get blindsided by these lame excuses for policy arguments.
Why in the world does George Bush, Ken Mehlman and the rest of the leadership need to be reminded that the American people are paying attention to the events in Iraq and the rest of the world and refuse to engage their supporters in an at least daily dialogue of the reasons we are there.
I am so sick of lame leadership I could just puke.
I firmly believe that our policy and public relations are being orchestrated by James Carville.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home


Powered by Blogger