Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Cease Fire

Today, Condoleeza Rice met with leaders from several European and Arab governments to discuss a possible cease fire between Hezbollah and Israel (Syria, Iran, and Israel were not there, I should note - the three countries that might be able to actualize a halt to the killings). The Bush Administration dragged its feet, sending Rice only this week to the region to talk with both sides.

The Administration clearly has no desire to see a cease fire between Israel and Hezbollah. Although the other government officials came to the meeting in Rome arguing for a demand for an immediate cease fire, Rice was hell bent on preventing that.

The BBC reported that nearly an hour and a half was spent debating whether the phrase "immediate" should be used in relation to a cease fire. In the end, Kofi Annan, still declared the need for an immediate cease fire, and BBC News ran with that as its headline.

[Note: the photo is courtesy of About.com. I quite like the Condi-Conan look.]

Her rhetoric justifying a position of no cease fire is worth considering. According to the New York Times, Rice said after the meeting:
"It doesn't do anyone any good to raise false hopes about something that's not going to happen. It's not going to happen. I did say to the group 'When will we learn?' The fields of the Middle East are littered with broken cease-fires."
Translation:
"What is the point of working towards a solution? People will only die anyway? Best to give up now, and just let Israel bomb Hezbollah into the stone age, along with the Lebanese civilians who are stuck in the middle."
The U.S. apparently has a new approach to diplomacy: Diplomacy works best that works least.

Time has a compelling commentary on "Condi in Diplomatic Disneyland".

4 comments:

T DWORSKY said...

Doesn't it just knock you in the common sense to think, "how do these things actually get started?" Then Condi lets out the off-speak and you say to yourself, "Oh, that's how."

Rod Carveth said...

Jen,

In the 5.5 years of this administration, only one person -- the one who actually had combat experience -- had a realistic understanding of foreign policy and that was Colin Powell. He aptly observed that if we were going to attack Iraq, we had to be prepared that if we broke, we bought it.

Since then, we've been led by a group of clueless chickenhawks who have cost us over 2500 fine Americans and $300 billion, and we're left with a Middle East that is far more dangerous.

2008 can't come soon enough.

Anna M. said...

...banging her head against the wall...

Anonymous said...

The present administration couldn't care less what happens in Lebanon. Israel, after all, is doing our dirty work.

The thing that really gets me is we think we are making our world a safer place.

We didn't do a thing in Iraq but make it even more of a hotbed for violence. And now we're sending even more troops b/c, oops, the mission in fact is not accomplished.

At times, I'm frankly embarassed to be an American.