The Final Bush Legacy: Why the US Abstained on the Gaza Resolution

We were quite surprised when the US, represented by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, abstained in the UN Security Council vote on the Gaza cease-fire resolution late Thursday night. After all, as we noted yesterday, Rice had joined British Foreign Minister David Miliband and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner in the development of the resolution, in part to block the Libyan-drafted alternative.

Now we have a partial answer to the mystery:

The call that changed everything apparently came just as ministers and ambassadors were taking their seats in the council chamber. It was President George Bush for Ms Rice. Don't veto the resolution, he said, but don't vote for it either.

Apparently, Bush had just gotten off the phone with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who appealed to the White House to override the State Department and ensure that the US did not support the cease-fire call.

Since it was the British who drafted the resolution and did a lot of the heavy lifting to line up support, especially from Arab delegates --- "it was hairy there for the moment", said one British official --- the Foreign Office is none too impressed with Washington. (Which is why some of their staff gave this story to The Independent and to the Guardian)

So it's a final legacy for President Bush, refusing to back a cease-fire and effectively green-lighting Israel to carry on with the killing (of both Hamas fighters and civilians) in Gaza. But that leaves a further mystery: who really made the decision to pull away from the resolution?

In the history of this Administration, as detailed by writers like Barton Gellman, Thomas Ricks, and James Risen, the Vice President's office and the Pentagon have often bypassed and even trampled upon the State Department to push through their own strategic ideas. Well, Donald Rumsfeld and his deputies may be long gone, but Dick Cheney remains, at least for another 10 days.

So did the Vice President step in again or was it really "The Decider", as Bush likes to style himself, who did make a fateful decision?

A Farewell Song For George Bush: "When The President Talks To God"

Here's a somewhat provocative nominee for our 'Farewell Song For George Bush' contest. If you want to suggest a nominee, you can do so here.  Voting opens Wednesday!

[youtube]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxLWONH926M&feature=related[/youtube]

See all the Farewell Song contest entrants

A Farewell Song For George Bush: "Let's Impeach The President"

Nominee number seven in our 'Farewell George W' contest comes from a loyal Enduring America reader- my mum. When CSNY toured the US in 2006 this song got every audience member on their feet (though in some cities half were just looking for the exit):

[youtube]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=k4kTnP5VJ1k[/youtube]

See all the Farewell Song contest entrants

A Farewell Song for George Bush: "They Think We're Disposable"

A sixth nominee for a Good-bye to our 43rd President. This one is quite quirky --- moviegoers might recall it in a far different context --- but I think the sentiments are worthwhile:

[youtube]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=vOp4nxlbb1w&feature=related[/youtube]

See all the Farewell Song contest entrants

Gaza Update (3 January): Getting Fatah Back In

Update: An Israeli bomb has killed nine and wounded at least 60 in a mosque in the northern Gaza town of Beit Lahiya. According to CNN, "leaflets signed by the commander of the Israeli military were dropped over northern Gaza on Saturday morning, warning residents to 'leave the area immediately' to ensure their safety".

So, a week into the Israeli attack on Gaza, we finally get the political gameplan, courtesy of President Bush: "I urge all parties...to support legitimate Palestinian leaders working for peace."

"Legitimate Palestinian leaders" means the Fatah Party, which is the dominant Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. But how do you get Fatah back in, when they were rejected --- both politically and militarily --- from Gaza over the last years? Amidst a lull in most media coverage, the answer comes from McClatchy News Services:

Israel, Arab countries and the United States are discussing how to create an international force that would safeguard an eventual cease-fire, diplomats said Friday. A key part of the arrangement is that the main Palestinian rival to the ruling Hamas party would be asked to take charge of border crossings.

Thus the other key sentence in Bush's statement, to be broadcast on Saturday, "There must be monitoring mechanisms in place to help ensure that smuggling of weapons to terrorist groups in Gaza comes to an end."

In fact, that's been part of the American and possibly the Israeli strategy from the start of operations: topple Hamas, with whom you won't negotiate, and install Fatah/the Palestinian Authority, with whom you will. CNN television's carefully-orchestrated interviews with experts such as Jon Alterman, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, were playing this out last weekend.

On the surface, putting Fatah/PA in would satisfy not only Washington and Tel Aviv but most Arab countries, who prefer to back PA leader Mahmoud Abbas rather than Hamas. Only one problem: where is the support for Fatah, which was discredited by charges of inefficiency, corruption, and a failure to provide public services even before Hamas beat them at the Gaza polls in 2006? McClatchy concludes:

While there's Arab and Western support for Abbas' U.S.-backed security forces taking control of the crossings, it isn't clear how that could be carried out. U.S. officials acknowledge that there's little chance that the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank, could reassume political power in the Gaza Strip anytime soon.

I think it's safe to say that the Hamas leadership in Gaza won't be accepting any proposal for Fatah security forces on the borders. So, if they maintain their support amongst the Gazan population, the question is thrown back to Israel and its supporters in Washington.

Do they accept another cease-fire proposal based not on the political goal of getting Fatah in but on an "international monitoring force"? Or does Israel play its last military card and send the ground troops across the border?