December 21, 2003

WHAT OTHER OPTIONS DID EUROPE HAVE, BUT SURRENDER?:


Easing Iraq's Debt Burdens (NY Times, 12/21/03)

James Baker III is quickly showing how old-fashioned diplomacy can advance Washington's policy objectives. In his first trip as President Bush's Iraqi debt negotiator, Mr. Baker met with five European leaders and emerged with declarations endorsing a substantial write-off of the $40 billion in old loans and accrued interest that Baghdad owes major developed countries. The five countries Mr. Baker visited, together with the United States, account for roughly $25 billion of those obligations. That's only a start — Iraq's overall debt amounts to $120 billion — but it's an important one.

Mr. Baker's itinerary included France, Germany and Russia, the most prominent European critics of the American-led invasion of Iraq, as well as Britain and Italy. His successful meetings in Paris and Berlin led to the most unified declaration on Iraq since last winter's damaging split in the Security Council. The Moscow session was less rewarding, with President Vladimir Putin linking support for debt relief to compensation for Russian companies that had contracts with Saddam Hussein.

The leaders of France and Germany were already looking for politically feasible ways to work with Washington on Iraq. Mr. Baker also benefited from the good reputation he enjoys in both countries, dating back to his role as secretary of state in the first Bush administration, when deft and sensitive American diplomacy helped manage the consequences of the collapse of the Soviet Union. That record stands in painful contrast to the current administration's gratuitous alienation of much of Europe, most recently through a Pentagon memo excluding France, Germany, Russia and other opponents of the war from Iraqi reconstruction contracts financed by American tax dollars. Releasing that memo on the eve of Mr. Baker's European trip was inept. Fortunately, it did not prevent French and German cooperation on debt relief for Iraq.


Let's give the Timesmen the benefit of the doubt and assume that they're only playing stupid here, when they pretend that these results are a contrast to, not a function of, American unilateralism.

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 21, 2003 10:30 AM
Comments

Ah the Liberal Mindset as best captured by the NYT...

When you can write headlines along the lines of
"Inspite increases in benefits San Francisco's homeless population grows"; or "Prison Population Increases even as Crime Rate drops"; etc., I think is fair to say you have given up trying to diagnose cause and effect in the real world.

Posted by: MG at December 21, 2003 10:51 AM

This is no more, no less, a Chapter 11 reorganization of an insolvent. I am sure that Baker, is his suave velvet hammer way, impressed upon the "creditors" that their options were to take a lesser amount with a longer term payoff or face abrogation. Not an unusual arrangement.

Posted by: Ted Miller at December 21, 2003 2:18 PM

Playing stupid? They are stupid. I'll bet Baker carried documents from Iraq, with which he blackmailed the Three Weasels.

Diplomacy, my posterior!

Posted by: Alan Sullivan at December 21, 2003 6:03 PM

The Timesman is a moron. They really don't get it.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 21, 2003 11:42 PM

The NYT probably didn't mind so much that Baker potentially blackmailed them; but to spin it that way would mean that the European mandarins caved in to Bush's "gentle hints."

What? Tarnish the aura of Euro-sophistication? Raise the specter of double dealing? Or mention anything that might even vaguely imply the Bush administration deserved any credit for this impressive policy victory?

Heh, heh. Hence the spin.

Posted by: Barry Meislin at December 22, 2003 2:35 AM

The Russians folded a little more earlier today.

Posted by: jim hamlen at December 22, 2003 8:55 PM
« BELIEVE ME, YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH MY PARTNER: | Main | BACK TO THE FRONTIERS: »