Salvaging the Bush Presidency

Every day, the news gets worse for the White House. Just to name a few recent scandals:

- Libby conviction
- FBI/Patriot Act scandal
- White House involvement in federal prosecutor firings (Rove's back, and he's learned nothing!)
- Army veteran healthcare scandal
- Losing Congress

and capping it all off: the never-ending debacle in Iraq.

The administration seems to be unraveling, and presidential approval ratings seem to agree with that assessment. But is there anything Bush can do to salvage his legacy?

My suggestion:

Push hard for a Palestinian-Israel settlement. Put the screws on Israel. Right now. And specifically, push for Saudi's 2002 peace proposal. This proposal will be re-endorsed by the Arab League on March 28. It has all the elements for a workable accord.

This isn't going to solve the Iraq war problem, but it could give the U.S. some breathing room in the Middle East. The Israel-Palestinian problem is the big foreign policy prize, and although Bush and Rice have almost no credibility to pursue it, they can exert huge influence and hand a huge foreign policy victory to the Islamic world that will promote real security for Israel too.

Victory in Iraq is not possible. But the 2002 Saudi peace proposal is within range of the politically viable. There is nothing that the U.S. could do that would divert more positive Muslim attention away from our failure in Iraq than an allout drive for an Israel-Palestinian accord.

If Bush can succeed here, it will also give him some maneuvering room in Iraq that can be passed to the next president. This could be Bush's much needed apology to the American people and the world for what he has done to the Middle East.

 

Just put Bob Gates in charge and he'll salvage something.

 

Losing Congress wasn't a scandal.


And I highly doubt there will be a Palestinan-Israel solution, even if they pushed for it. I mean, how do you push for a solution when one party denies the other exists entirely?

 

Losing Congress was a reflection of the Bush administration's failure in Iraq.

I mean, how do you push for a solution when one party denies the other exists entirely?

By making recognition of Israel part of the solution.

 

Here's an idea:

Admit his mistakes. Publicly. Ask for forgiveness. It always works.

Give up on the "I am God Incarnate on Earth. Everything I say and do is right because I am not just the messenger, I am the second coming of Christ" spiel. It's getting really scary. Even worse, people are believing him.

 

But, if thats something that won't be accepted, you reach a stalemate

 

But, if thats something that won't be accepted, you reach a stalemate

But what else do the Palestinians have to bargain with? You can't make them give up their only chip before they even get to the table.

 

At least some of those in charge are in an all or nothing state, though

 

No, they're not. It's a bargaining position. The fact that Israel is unwilling to come to the table unless they give up their only leverage proves, for those who have even the slightest doubt, that Israel is the party obstructing progress. They're not interested in negotiations, they're only interested in dictating terms.

 

Saudi Arabia's 2002 peace plan requires that Israel

-withdraw from all territories occupied in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war,
-work toward a "just" solution to the Palestinian refugee problem
-recognize a sovereign, independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip

in return for which the Arab countries recognize Israel and establish normal relations with it.

I didn't say it was easy or even likely, but only that if Bush can help make it happen (by backing the Saudi plan) it will salvage his legacy.

 

The Bush presidency is un-salvagable. He'll always be remembered as the president who led us into a war with no clear purpose while losing sight of our main enemy.

Depsite the coalition between Fatah and Hamas, the Palestinians will not officially recognize Israel anytime soon. Hamas simply won't. It'll be the job of the next president, I think. Of course, miracles have happened before.

 

I don't want the democratic Congress to squander the next 2 years investigating George Bush, but that is where we are headed. One Congressional investigation after another, with everyone feeling dirty and betrayed and disenchanted at the end of it when it's time to elect another president.

I'm not saying that these investigations aren't richly deserved. But a foreign policy initiative of epic proportions could raise the president's approval ratings, deflate tensions with the Arab world, and make progress on a legitimate international geopolitical problem.

I'm not making this argument because it was part of the Baker commission's report, nor do I believe an Israeli-Palestinian accord will make the Iraq war go away. I'm simply looking at this as an option open to the president to change the momentum of his last years in office.

 

Y'know, this whole Presidency hasn't been doing anything for anyone. Let's face it. Why salvage it? Scrap it and declare the past 6 years as a "do-over".

 

I don't think you can salvage a presidency that's been managed this badly. Even if he woke up one morning and declared he would work toward re-forming his administration he'd still be remembered as a terrible president.

 

But clearly we're not getting a refund for the past 6 years, perhaps the bleakest in the last 3 decades of American history, so it would be nice if we could harness the last 2 years of the administration to do some useful work.

The Israel-Palestinian problem is the most important foreign policy prize out there, aside from ending the Iraq war, which I should add is never going to end.

 

Salvaging the presidency would involve undoing most of his major policy actions. If we could just get to where we were before he came president that would be a good showing.

 

Why don't we resurrect a popular past president as a zombie and put him in charge? At least he'll be easier to understand.

 

Zombie Gerald Ford's first act as president - eat Dick Cheney's brain. What does pure evil taste like?

 

It can't be saved IMO. He'll always go down as the President who destroyed the global wave of sympathy over 9/11, with an outrageous and probably illegal war against Iraq and then through a series of disasterous decisions allowed the aftermarth to desend into anarchy and civil war.

 

I don't think it is a question of if it is possible for it to be saved, but a question of if they are willing to try and save it. To do the things that would require them to "save" his presidency, they would have to reject all or in part most of his actions, up to and including admitting the war in Iraq was a mistake. And from a practical standpoint, if they do that they loose the 30% of the population that is still deslusional enough to support him. It was arrogance that lead us to the problems they are facing now, and it is their same arrogance that is going to lead to the investigations. They did pretty much whatever they wanted to for 6 years, and we have seen what happens. The Bush administration's idea of salvaging the presidency is probably to return to that post 9/11 time where they could scare people into doing what they wanted. When, and not if, there is another major terrorist attack in this country there will be nothing left to salvage.

 

read "Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis of the American Superpower" by Zbigniew Brzezinski. Its ounds very interesting and relevant to what you guys are talking are talking about.

 

Salvaging the presidency right now would be nearly impossible. It would tank the administration. In order to "salvage" the Bush presidency, Mr. Bush would almost have to fire most of his staff and start replacing most of the key cabinet posts in order to even begin moving in a new direction (even if he started moving that way, having people from the "Old" presidency will (1) be a signal to Washington insiders and the press that the changes will only be minor and (2) be counterproductive to the process as most of these people were involved in the old policies). This would lead to a lengthy confirmation process for the cabinet members and sap what little political capital the president has left (though it could lead to a "deposit," as it were, if the nominees were moderate and indicative of this new direction).

And, if this were possible, I'm not sure what the president could do to salvage this administration. Possibly a Middle East peace initiative (but this is a dangerous prospect, wrought with potential for disaster). A real heavy, centrist domestic policy push might be good (perhaps a move toward real health care reform, the "G. W. Bush Health Care System"), but that would almost certainly involve compromises that the president seems totally unwilling to make.

All in all, the best it seems Mr. Bush can do is limp to the finish line and hope that the war in Iraq and the broader war on "terrorism" is handled more seriously and creatively in future administrations. Then, at least, he may be remembered as the president who began the move toward engagement of extremist movements that threaten global stability and safety. Of course, I cannot imagine an effective engagement looking like what Mr. Bush has been promoting, but that's neither here nor there.

-kai

 

Trade in six bad years for two good, and you still have four bad years. As a historian, I find this poetic. All the speeches and lectures about what "History" will think of us, and the lessons we should be learning, are beginning to turn around on this administration. Regardless of what they do now, they can't change what has already happened.

This administration has become one giant leftist "I told you so" six years in the making. I still remember when the supreme court decided the election. My left leaning school let out a collective "Oh ****". The crazy guy with the red white and blue penis duct-taped to his helmet was right, and that is the scary part.

 

No, they're not. It's a bargaining position. The fact that Israel is unwilling to come to the table unless they give up their only leverage proves, for those who have even the slightest doubt, that Israel is the party obstructing progress. They're not interested in negotiations, they're only interested in dictating terms.

How is Israel being "obstructionist" by refusing to negotiate with a government that doesn't recognize it's right to exist?

By even to the Palestinian authority with this in the platform, it implies that Israel at least in part agrees with it; this further legitimizes radical claims of such and helps spark violence.

You cannot honestly expect a country to negotiate with an enemy who has publicly refused to recognize it. The first rule of diplomatic relations involves recognition. If the palestinian authority doesn't recognize Israel, how can they legitimately hold talks with it?

It is not reasonable to ask a government to hold talks with an entity that wants to see it gone. While the newfound Hamas/Hezbollah alliance may not be calling for the wholesale destruction of Israel as public policy, neither have they chosen to recognize the nation.

Negotiations cannot go forward under these conditions. Claiming that this unfairly undermines the Palestinians is a one-sided excuse to place the blame for the current quagmire solely on Israel's shoulders. The blames goes in many different ways. I have said numerous times on this board that the peace process will not advance until the issue of blame and accepting the "greatest fault" is set aside.

diz, I agree with everything you say about 99.9% of the time; unfortunately, we are on very different sides of this issue (although I am no Israeli apologist, many of their actions are downright atrocious and embarassing).

I still love you though !

Peace,

V-03

 

Oh look, another anti-Bush thread. Gotta love them Bush bashers.