[iwar] [fc:The.Rise.Of.A.Divergent.'Team.Bush']

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-10-02 05:25:08


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-2587-1002025522-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 02 Oct 2001 05:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 11382 invoked by uid 510); 2 Oct 2001 12:25:31 -0000
Received: from n35.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.85) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 2 Oct 2001 12:25:31 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-2587-1002025522-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.55] by n35.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Oct 2001 12:25:23 -0000
X-Sender: fc@big.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 2 Oct 2001 12:25:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 99540 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2001 12:25:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Oct 2001 12:25:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO big.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Oct 2001 12:25:18 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by big.all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id FAA02549 for iwar@onelist.com; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 05:25:08 -0700
Message-Id: <200110021225.FAA02549@big.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 05:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:The.Rise.Of.A.Divergent.'Team.Bush']
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Christian Science Monitor
October 1, 2001
The Rise Of A Divergent 'Team Bush' 

Almost Invisible Before Sept. 11, Cabinet Leaders Are Now Players. But They
Don't All See Eye To Eye. 

By Francine Kiefer, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
WASHINGTON - Before Sept.  11, President Bush's Cabinet - a clutch of
seasoned, respected "big names" - had practically disappeared from view. 
Power, it turned out, was consolidated in the White House - not
dispersed among the department heads - as Mr.  Bush's team of Texas
political advisers sought to portray the new, inexperienced president as
the man in charge.  Things had gone so much in that direction that, just
the day before the terrorist attacks, Time magazine appeared on
newsstands with this headline in big, red letters: "Where have you gone,
Colin Powell?"

"We were at the point of saying the cabinet is not relevant and that
Karl Rove [Bush's political adviser from Texas] was king," says Paul
Light, an expert on government at the Brookings Institution.  "That has
clearly changed dramatically."

In the "war on terrorism," Team Bush is suddenly and conspicuously on
display.  The president is deploying more cabinet secretaries than might
be expected during a more conventional war - encompassing law
enforcement and air safety, finance and diplomacy.  Secretary of State
Powell, for one, has had more than 115 phone calls with diplomats around
the world, and his office is a revolving door of who's who overseas. 

But the team style of decision making poses many challenges - not only
because of the divergent personalities involved, but also because of the
complexity of waging a war on terrorism.  The team needs to redraw the
line, for example, between civil liberties and tighter security.  And it
must settle on goals (such as whether the war should include Iraq as a
target) and strategy (such as how to "smoke out" Osama bin Laden from
mountainous Afghanistan - if he is even still there - and punish the
government that has harbored him). 

Conflict in the ranks

Some conflicts within the team have already become evident.  The
president has resolved at least one of these - such as his decision to
confine a military strike to Afghanistan.  But that may be only his
short-term response. 

"Everything about this is in motion," says Richard Perle, assistant
secretary of Defense in the Reagan years.  "There's a constant process
of reexamining and looking further into options."

As the sands shift, the advice that probably counts most is that coming
from Bush's secretive, inner circle of security experts, including Mr. 
Powell, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, National Security Adviser
Condoleezza Rice, and Vice President Dick Cheney. 

Powell is widely considered the most cautious of this team.  He served
as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff in the Gulf War, but he also
sat in the Oval Office of George Bush Sr.  and argued against using
force to roll back the Iraqi army from Kuwait, according to Bob
Woodward's book "The Commanders."

Although the United States could use force, Powell had said, a strategy
of "containment" and isolation would eventually grind down Saddam
Hussein and force him to retreat. 

Bush Sr.  rejected the containment idea, which Powell acknowledged could
take a year or two. 

That decision was no doubt cheered by Mr.  Cheney, then secretary of
Defense, who early on had adopted a much more aggressive stance on the
Iraqi invasion than did Powell. 

The current Defense secretary, Mr.  Rumsfeld, is also said to be
considerably more comfortable with risk than is Powell.  His deputy,
Paul Wolfowitz, has urged "ending states who sponsor terrorism," and,
like Rumsfeld, is said to advocate a broader war that also targets Iraq. 

Says a former government official of Rumsfeld: "He's just as concerned
about the risks of doing nothing."

Decision time

For the time being, Bush has settled the debate over the scope of the
war.  At Camp David on the weekend after the attacks, he consulted with
Ms.  Rice after the other advisers had left.  He told the national
security adviser, who, like himself, is not experienced in matters of
war, that he wanted to move ahead in phases, starting with Mr.  bin
Laden and his Afghan protectors.  "The initial phase is focused on
Afghanistan," says an administration official.  "This was the
president's decision."

A more subdued tone

As a result, Defense Department officials last week adopted a more
cautious tone, saying that the military was not the main tool in the
war.  "We're not leaping into this," Rumsfeld told reporters.  "We're
moving into it in a measured way."

Some analysts say the parrying between the State and Defense departments
is probably a healthy thing.  Presidential historian Henry Graff, citing
the Vietnam years, says it can be unwise to manage a war from a small
clique inside the White House. 

"You lose perspective because you don't get a broad enough base of
opinion," he warns.  On the other hand, he adds, "it's necessary, I
suppose, for secrecy, brevity, and speed."

As for Bush himself, one former government official characterizes him as
more hawkish than all his advisers, saying, "I think the president has
the greatest tolerance for [risk] of any of his people." Since the first
week of the attacks, though, Bush has been less bellicose in his public
statements. 

Whether that's because of the influence of Powell or Rice - or of his
father - is unclear.  One recent news report stated that the elder Bush
counseled his son to tone down his language in the wake of the attacks. 


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Pinpoint the right security solution for your company- Learn how to add 128- bit encryption and to authenticate your web site with VeriSign's FREE guide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/yQix2C/33_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:53 PST