Posted on 10/06/2003 6:13:00 PM PDT by blam
White House challenges Pentagon's role in Iraq
By Alec Russell in Washington
(Filed: 07/10/2003)
President George W Bush has ordered the White House to take tighter control over American operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, an apparent sign of dissatisfaction with the Pentagon-led efforts on the ground.
His national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, is to head an "Iraq stabilisation group", giving the White House a more active role.
President Bush listens to national security adviser Condoleezza Rice in the Oval Office
The change was seen as the closest the administration has come to acknowledging that the Pentagon's post-war mission in Iraq and the State Department's reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan have not gone as planned.
With Mr Bush's ratings drooping amid declining confidence over his handling of foreign policy, his previous strength, it suggests that his advisers have seen the need for some good news from Iraq as next year's re-election campaign draws closer.
It was also seen as part of a fight back by Ms Rice, one of Mr Bush's closest aides, who is thought to have struggled in the past year to co-ordinate policy between Colin Powell, the secretary of state, and Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, the two feuding barons of the administration.
The new order was outlined in a confidential memorandum sent by Ms Rice to Mr Powell, Mr Rumsfeld and the director of the CIA, George Tenet. She told The New York Times that it was drawn up by herself, Mr Powell, Mr Rumsfeld and Vice-President Dick Cheney.
It was a "recognition by everyone that we are in a different stage now", she said. For Ms Rice it is a chance to convert her greatest asset in Washington, regular "face time" with the president, into some genuine clout.
When she took office almost three years ago she indicated that she did not want the National Security Council to be as involved as it was under Bill Clinton, who was known for his micro-managing of foreign policy.
But recently her softly-softly approach has been compared unfavourably with the more pugnacious style of Henry Kissinger and other of her predecessors.
The White House insisted yesterday that the change did not reflect dissatisfaction with post-war progress and that the Pentagon and the "proconsul" in Iraq, Paul Bremer, would continue to lead the operations in Iraq.
But in Washington it was seen as reflecting frustration at the mixed news from Iraq and Afghanistan as polls suggest Americans are losing confidence in Mr Bush's handling of foreign policy, his great strength in the public mind since the September 11 attacks.
With Mr Bush's request for Congress to approve $87 billion (£52 billion) for Iraq and Afghanistan the most contentious Iraq-related issue for most Americans, the White House is particularly keen to have more control over the finances.
A CBS/New York Times poll last weekend found that 50 per cent of people do not have confidence in Mr Bush's ability to handle international crises.
"The president knows his legacy and maybe re-election depends on getting this right," one administration official told The New York Times yesterday. "This is as close as anyone will come to acknowledging that this is not working."
|
|
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! |
|
I agree but why Bush did this is a good question. My initial reaction is that he needs to get a handle on Iraqi PR. Putting Condi/White House in the middle of it will allow a much better coordination of the real story in Iraq which is that real progress is being made. I think you will start to see a series of Iraqi sucess stories flowing out of this new organization. Time will tell.
Maybe the pentagon has other things to do... ahem.
Yup. I just saw Elenor Holmes-Norton on H&C say it was a failing policy...or something to that effect.
Thanks, Wolverine. The press has been trying to divide members of this administration from the beginning.
The admin. is on to 'em. SOS Powell was the angriest at the press re. their Kay report dishonesty last week.
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.