bush's days and weeks become 6 mos. interesting article
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2003 9:56 am
By Joseph Curl
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
President Bush told the United Nations on Sept. 13 182 days ago that "we expect quick resolution to the issue" of Iraqi disarmament, setting a deadline of "days and weeks, not months and years." Top Stories
Exactly six months later, he's still waiting, mired in an ever-growing U.N. debate. The U.N. Security Council met his first deadline by passing Resolution 1441 in 57 days, but the world body has dragged its feet over the following 125 days, with Mr. Bush accepting repeated extensions and modifications to a second resolution he says he doesn't even need.
His decision yesterday to withdraw today's deadline for a vote on an 18th U.N. resolution on Iraq and allow the debate to push into next week threatens to reduce the president's credibility on his assertion Jan. 15 that "time is running out."
"The continuing delay, at this point, offers no real benefits and instead is creating far more problems," said one senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
Among those "problems" is an unstable economy in which financial markets remain jittery about the effects of war, growing war protests and a fragile coalition that threatens to splinter if the matter drags on longer, the official said.
Mr. Bush's decision to withdraw deadlines and allow the debate to continue for weeks and months is sending a mixed message to the world, said Lee Hamilton, a former congressman and now president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
"I think the United States has to be firm on the timeline. Obviously, it's a mistake when we say, 'We're demanding a vote on Friday,' and then you back away from that. ... You shouldn't set a target like that and then back away from it," Mr. Hamilton said.
On the other hand, the 17-term congressman said, delays are sometimes unavoidable and can pay off.
"This is crunch time. ... If we delay another few days and put out the benchmarks that the [British] have talked about, we have a chance of getting some more votes. Clearly, President Bush thinks that is the right thing to do," he said.
"It's like the Congress. You have to scramble for votes. That's exactly what we're doing here, only the stakes are a lot higher than they would be for a piece of legislation," Mr. Hamilton added.
That latter stance is espoused by Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer, who said yesterday that the delays merely illustrate "the fluid situation with the diplomacy."
"The end is coming into sight. ... I cannot predict for you every shape and turn of the road on the way to that end, but this end is coming into sight, and that's why you're seeing some levels of flexibility and discussion of options as it comes into sight," he said.
All options are on the table, including the abandonment of a U.N. vote, said Mr. Fleischer, who had said earlier this week that the president wanted a Security Council vote by today.
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
President Bush told the United Nations on Sept. 13 182 days ago that "we expect quick resolution to the issue" of Iraqi disarmament, setting a deadline of "days and weeks, not months and years." Top Stories
Exactly six months later, he's still waiting, mired in an ever-growing U.N. debate. The U.N. Security Council met his first deadline by passing Resolution 1441 in 57 days, but the world body has dragged its feet over the following 125 days, with Mr. Bush accepting repeated extensions and modifications to a second resolution he says he doesn't even need.
His decision yesterday to withdraw today's deadline for a vote on an 18th U.N. resolution on Iraq and allow the debate to push into next week threatens to reduce the president's credibility on his assertion Jan. 15 that "time is running out."
"The continuing delay, at this point, offers no real benefits and instead is creating far more problems," said one senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
Among those "problems" is an unstable economy in which financial markets remain jittery about the effects of war, growing war protests and a fragile coalition that threatens to splinter if the matter drags on longer, the official said.
Mr. Bush's decision to withdraw deadlines and allow the debate to continue for weeks and months is sending a mixed message to the world, said Lee Hamilton, a former congressman and now president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
"I think the United States has to be firm on the timeline. Obviously, it's a mistake when we say, 'We're demanding a vote on Friday,' and then you back away from that. ... You shouldn't set a target like that and then back away from it," Mr. Hamilton said.
On the other hand, the 17-term congressman said, delays are sometimes unavoidable and can pay off.
"This is crunch time. ... If we delay another few days and put out the benchmarks that the [British] have talked about, we have a chance of getting some more votes. Clearly, President Bush thinks that is the right thing to do," he said.
"It's like the Congress. You have to scramble for votes. That's exactly what we're doing here, only the stakes are a lot higher than they would be for a piece of legislation," Mr. Hamilton added.
That latter stance is espoused by Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer, who said yesterday that the delays merely illustrate "the fluid situation with the diplomacy."
"The end is coming into sight. ... I cannot predict for you every shape and turn of the road on the way to that end, but this end is coming into sight, and that's why you're seeing some levels of flexibility and discussion of options as it comes into sight," he said.
All options are on the table, including the abandonment of a U.N. vote, said Mr. Fleischer, who had said earlier this week that the president wanted a Security Council vote by today.
A few months ago, I thought we would be at war with Iraq very soon. I am not holding my breath any more.