WHEN BUREAUCRACIES COLLIDE

Newt raises the heat in Washington's tribal spat (Trevor Royle, 11 May 2003, Sunday Herald)

While the intervention was not unexpected, the rigour of Gingrich's words has surprised Washington's diplomatic community: one source called it 'a hyena attack which was less about the shortcomings of the State Department and more about the rivalry between Secretary Powell and Donald Rumsfeld'. There is nothing new in the enmity between the two men. Throughout the Bush administration they have been at each other's throats, disagreeing over the policies to be pursued against Afghanistan and Iraq and now the Middle East and North Korea. Put bluntly, Powell favours negotiated settlements or diplomacy, while Rumsfeld sees nothing wrong with using force or threatening its use.

The defence secretary also believes in attack being the best form of defence and is famous for bombarding the State Department with his Rummygrams -- memos backed by newspaper cuttings which ask demanding questions of the recipient. Not surprisingly, officials resent the interference from the Pentagon and take a healthy interest in rebutting Rumsfeld's probing. This has led to bureaucratic squabbling with officials determined to get the better of their opposite numbers, and at times it has looked as if the inter-departmental war is actually driving US policy. For example, when the State Department made clear its opposition to the presence in post-war Iraq of Ahmed Chalabi, the Pentagon responded by flying the exiled Iraqi opposition leader into Baghdad.

The clash of policies and personalities has added immeasurably to the tensions which emerged during the operations in Iraq and have continued in the aftermath. Powell favours the involvement of the UN in the reconstruction process while Rumsfeld thinks it is the work of the devil. The former likes the idea of inclusiveness while the latter is guided by the primacy of US interests and believes a coalition should only include willing members. A notable scalp was won by the State Department when its nominee Paul 'Jerry' Bremer was named as the White House's representative to Iraq. With his diplomatic background -- he has served the State Department for 23 years as an executive and an ambassador -- he is close to Powell and, with his ability to listen to other points of view he is liked by the inhabitants of Foggy Bottom, the State Department's home in Washington.

The selection was pure theatre. Rumsfeld had touted a rival nominee and had briefed journalists accordingly but when questioned about the appointment Powell counter-attacked with the thought that he 'didn't think it was going to happen'. Bremer's appointment is a counterweight to Rumsfeld's choice of retired soldier Jerry Garner but in this proxy war between the rival departments there is no time to think about casualties or wins and losses. No sooner had Bremer's appointment been ratified than Rumsfeld saw two of his nominees taking important positions in the administration of the armed forces -- Colin McMillan, an oil executive, becomes secretary of the navy while James Roche, a former executive with defence giants, Northrop Grumman, has been appointed secretary of the army.

Both are Rumsfeld men through and through and, according to Pentagon sources, both are in sympathy with the policy of deterrence and pre-emption which underpins Bush's national security policy. McMillan was close to Bush's presidential campaign and worked for Cheney when he was defence secretary while Roche, an arms procurement specialist, is a strong supporter of Rumsfeld's innovative 'lite' strategies which underpinned the operations in Iraq. The men also share a business background with Rumsfeld -- McMillan is chairman of Permian Oil Exploration Company -- and although both will sever their links, the connections will raise eyebrows, given the extent of the defence secretary's own involvement with commerce. Last week it was revealed that in addition to having links with the Halliburton Corporation, a major beneficiary in awards for reconstruction work in Iraq, Rumsfeld was on the board of Zurich-based ABB company which sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea.

The irony is not lost on Rumsfeld's enemies. Although the sale was in support of the previous administration's rainbow policy of encouraging North Korea to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, Rumsfeld has now changed his tune and calls the country a 'terrorist regime' which is a legitimate target for the US. The revelation of his support for the deal will be deeply embarrassing but it is all grist to the mill for the abrasive defence secretary. It also brings into sharper focus the personal differences that exist between him and Powell. Whereas the Princeton-educated Rumsfeld comes from a background in which wealth and privilege are taken for granted and seats on boards are regarded as a natural perquisite, Powell is the son of Jamaican immigrants, was educated at City College, New York, and rose through the ranks of the army by his own efforts.

With both men at the top of their professions, neither can be caught out exploiting personal differences but officials say that discussions can descend to a locker-room level with Rumsfeld being the main culprit. When Powell described the inhabitants of Kabul as 'Afghanis' his opponent took great delight in correcting him. Niggled in that way, Powell usually responds with polite sarcasm.

Creative rivalry of this kind is hardly uncommon in Washington. Indeed it is encouraged by Bush, who runs meetings in a collegiate style, revelling in the fraternity house debates which follow.

One of the fictions that we're all required to engage in holds that, but for his tragic personal flaws, Bill Clinton might have been a great president. But you need look no further than the shallowness of his cabinet to see that such a destiny was never in the cards. Like all insecure men, he was frightened of having strong personalities around him, choosing instead people he knew he could pose him no threat. Because of this his administration--with the exception of Health Care, which was the exception and significantly was given to his wife not a Cabinet officer--never even attempted to achieve anything important.

By contrast, George W. Bush built a cabinet that's really unparalleled in recent American history in terms of the talent, forcefulness, and political independence of its members. The key to the structure though is that Mr. Bush, like Ronald Reagan before him, is unthreatened by these kinds of clashes, knowing that at the end of the day it is his decision that matters. Posted by Orrin Judd at May 11, 2003 10:52 AM