Chatting on a shaded veranda at one of Saddam Hussein's former palaces, the American general spoke with disarming candor. It was mid-May in the dictator's hometown of Tikrit, already a month after the regime's fall, but no one could say when or how genuine peace would be established.
The way the president greeted the first reports of a Palestinian ceasefire, you could be forgiven for wondering what all the fuss was about. Standing beside the leaders of the European Union inside the gilded East Room of the White House, Bush poured scorn on the whole story.
After three nights of protests in Tehran, the plainclothed militia decided to send a message to the students on the other side of the barricades. "First they tear-gassed the building, then they came in swinging their batons," says a gaunt-faced student who was in the Shahid Hemat dormitory on the night of Friday, June 13.
After three nights of protests in Tehran, the plainclothes militia decided to send a message to the students on the other side of the barricades. "First they tear-gassed the building, then they came in swinging their batons," says a gaunt-faced student who was in the Shahid Hemat dormitory on the night of Friday, June 13.
It's one thing to be committed to the dream of peace in the Middle East. It's something altogether different commit yourself to overcoming the biggest single roadblock on the Roadmap to a Palestinian state: security.Security (or the lack of it) is one of those rare things on which everyone agrees in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
George Tenet, the director of Central Intelligence, was frustrated. For four days and nights last winter, some of the most astute intelligence analysts in the U.S. government sat around Tenet's conference-room table in his wood-paneled office in Langley, Va., trying to prove that Saddam Hussein posed an imminent threat to America.
Let's face it: terrorism works. It works in the short run, blowing up the Middle East road map along with dozens of Israeli citizens. And it works in the long run, bringing the terrorists closer to their political goals.What we've witnessed in the space of one brief, bloody week is yet another display of how effective terrorists can be.
Let's rewind the tape a few months. As the Bush administration geared up for war in Iraq, many senior officials spoke glowingly about what victory in Baghdad would mean for the Middle East peace process. "If there were a change of regime in Iraq, would it help us in the peace process?" Paul Wolfowitz, deputy Defense Secretary, asked rhetorically a year ago. "You bet it would."So now that Saddam is out, what has happened to the peace process?
The most important VIP to visit Beijing last week arrived in a military uniform without fanfare or journalists in tow. Less than 48 hours before critical negotiations between the United States, North Korea and China got underway, the No. 2 man in Pyongyang's communist hierarchy, Vice Marshall Cho Myong Rok, met quietly with Chinese President Hu Jintao to ask for military assurances should the United States attack his country.
The call went out from the mosques of Lebanon's Bekaa Valley as the Iraq war began: the time had come to defend Islam. And Zein Ali Othman answered. The unemployed 38-year-old veteran of the Lebanese Army, along with three others, was able, he said, to travel into Syria and across the country without stopping for the usual formalities.
To the outside world, the eternal struggle over American foreign policy may seem perplexing. But for those at the heart of it all, every punctuation mark in every policy paper represents part of a much bigger challenge: how to exert American power in the world.
In the heavyweight prizefight over Iraq's future, the winner of round one seems to be Secretary of State Colin Powell. For months the Bush administration has been deeply split over how to move from a U.S. military occupation to a new government run by Iraqis.
It sounded like they were an old married couple who had just undergone a successful counseling session. "Expressions such as mending fences and defusing tensions have been used in the run up to today's meeting," said Lord Robertson, the NATO secretary-general who met with U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell in Brussels today."'Continued' and 'cooperation' are much better words.
You'd think the diplomacy had come to an end once the war began. After all, as Winston Churchill once quipped, it's a choice between talking and fighting: "To jaw-jaw is better than to war-war." Yet as the war in Iraq shifts from a first week of euphoric reporting to a second week of heavy fighting, the diplomacy shows every sign of sparking back to life.Tony Blair, the British prime minister, arrives at Camp David later this week for a hastily-arranged session with the president.
With a broad grin, the French foreign minister walked out of the Security Council chamber looking like he owned the place. Indeed, Dominique de Villepin seemed so cocksure of victory last week that he left the debate over Iraq's future before the crucial wavering nations--especially the three African countries--had said their piece.Either the French are playing a perfectly-pitched game of psychological warfare, or they know they can easily defeat the second United Nations resolution against...
If it was hard to put a price on Turkey's cooperation in the coming war in Iraq, how do you put a price on Tony Blair's cooperation with George W. Bush?That is the cold calculation facing the White House as it enters the diplomatic endgame surrounding Saddam Hussein's regime.