|
LOS ANGELES --- The job of U.S. secretary of State requires skating
on ice -- sometimes thin - and dodging diplomatic bullets -- even
if they later are found to be blanks. From this standpoint, could
the United States do any better than Colin Powell? The former four-star
general was on the road last week yet again. It was an eight-day,
eight-country swing through much of South and Southeast Asia that
he'll probably remember as one of his finer stretches in office.
It started bumpily
enough, though, in tension-filled South Asia, where India did not
take kindly to his advice about internationalizing upcoming
elections in disputed Kashmir and Jammu -- and in Pakistan, which
seemed irritated by the brevity of his visit there (five hours and
on to Thailand). But Powell was, in public at least, unruffled about
the Indian rebuff. For in the court of public opinion, he had made
his point: On both sides of the South Asian divide, improvement
is needed: India has to practice democracy more, and Pakistan should
sponsor terrorism less.
Then Powell
went on to Brunei, site of a foreign-minister-level meeting hosted
by the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN),
where he produced winners. Not unexpectedly but significantly, one
of the three charter members of President George W. Bush's ''axis
of evil'' showed up. You never know what the North Koreans will
do. But when Powell made himself available for a quick chat, North
Korea's foreign minister took the opportunity. The two had an unplanned
get-together. It turned out to be the highest-level contact between
Pyongyang and Washington -- despite its brief, 15-minute duration
- since the Bush administration took office. The instant effect
was to resurrect South Korean President Kim Dae Jung's preternaturally
wise but much-maligned sunshine policy of positive diplomacy
with the North from the dead.
All week, Powell
was the main-man-in-motion, also touching down for talks in Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, Singapore, Jakarta and Manila. Even more than
the president of the United States, the secretary of State in this
interdependent age has to be a traveling man or woman. The job doesn't
need so much a glad-handing politician as it does a credible vicar
and soft-spoken preacher for our nation's foreign policy who doesn't
cause an otherwise loyal ally's hair stand on end or prompt an edgy
foe to pump up the weapons budget.
Fortunately,
Powell is no blunderbuss. He has been largely careful, as to some
extent has been his counterpart at the Defense Department, Donald
Rumsfeld, to recognize that the American way is not necessarily
the only good way to go. And so, after helping put together a pair
of anti-terror pacts with ASEAN in Brunei last week, he went out
of his way to avoid the usual American rah-rah triumphalism. Indeed,
in Singapore, with Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong looking on approvingly,
he pointedly sought to make the reassuring point that the U.S. was
not about to force anti-terror troops down the throats of Asian
governments. And any such deployments would be carefully crafted
to fit into the local culture and customs, rather than antagonizing
or even rolling over them. Said Powell: That's the way we
go about these missions -- try not to be heavy-handed, try to go
to help.
With this, Powell
in effect joined hands with a recent predecessor, Warren Christopher,
Clinton's first secretary of State -- also viewed as a dove but
in fact a call-'em-as-I-see-'em pragmatist. In a wide-ranging speech
earlier this year at UCLA, Christopher emphasized the urgent need
for America to keeps its ego under control if it wished to maximize
its diplomatic effectiveness. While the United States might
often be the architect of an initiative, he said of the best
approach, other nations would join in the planning and construction,
their views would have weight, and their interests would be respected.
We might be the leader but not the boss.
To be sure,
Powell is not the boss and he knows who is. But he is the leader
of the kinder, gentler American image abroad. Without him, the Bush
administration risks losing ground internationally by seeming to
want to grab too much of it; with him, it loses no ground at all
simply by letting him lead.
|