In the wake of George W. Bush’s re-election and the myriad of comings and goings in his Cabinet, pundits have devoted considerable time to interpreting the direction of the second Bush term. On the international realm, the forecasts have generally fallen along two lines; the appointment of Condoleezza Rice as secretary of state has been focus of debate, used to legitimize or refute either hypothesis. One line of thought is that Bush will stay the course, projecting more or less activist, unilateral foreign policy. Others predict the realities of the world will dictate a more traditional foreign policy, based on alliances, international bodies, and multilateral agreements.
In all scenarios, Bush is not expected to face serious domestic obstacles. Republicans strengthened their hold on Congress, gaining a handful of seats in the House and unexpectedly picking up four seats in Senate. Despite narrow Republican majorities, Bush faced little opposition from Congress during his first term. In fact, Bush did not veto a single piece of legislation. On the surface, Bush appears to have a rubber stamp legislature at his disposal.
But recent events tell another story about Bush’s intentions and the difficulties he will most certainly encounter in the coming four years. One must first examine the list of new Cabinet appointees. The group is composed of Bush loyalists, such as Rice and Attorney General-designee Alberto Gonzalez, who are close to the president professionally, ideologically, and personally. For the most part, they, unlike their predecessors such as Colin Powell, John Ashcroft, or Tommy Thompson, lack independent power bases.
This is telling, since it shows that the president is circling the wagons, bracing for a fight, by ridding himself of the politically unreliable element within his Cabinet. Unlike when Bush assembled his first Cabinet in late 2000, the president is preparing to battle fellow— Republicans, not the marginalized Democrats who are preoccupied with soul searching after a gut-wrenching defeat. The real threat to Bush comes from the Republican Congress, particularly in the House of Representatives, where kingmaker and Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) will battle Bush for the heart of the Republican Party.
DeLay is a conservative “true believer” who is both less compromising and charismatic than his fellow-Texan, Bush. DeLay, a former exterminator, is a member of the “Christian right” that supports conservative social and economic positions that moderates and liberals characterize as extreme. His brand of conservatism differs from Bush’s, particularly on foreign policy.
DeLay advocates a right-wing foreign policy based on unilateral action. He is an outspoken critic of communism, and frequently speaks out against the “totalitarian” nations of Cuba and China. DeLay opposes the United Nations, led efforts to prevent the US from cooperating with the International Criminal Court, and viciously criticized France and other nations who opposed the US invasion of Iraq. He is an extremely strong supporter of Israel, and opposed the road map and other peace proposals. DeLay won the 2003 Zionist Organization of America’s Defender of Israel award.
During the first term, Bush’s neoconservative-driven foreign policy generally meshed with DeLay’s beliefs. But given the realities of the international scene and domestic budgetary pressure, Bush’s recent moves indicate the president is returning to a traditional foreign policy, based on international cooperation. Bush also seems to have de-prioritized reform, choosing to work with, rather than through, allies — many of whom are flawed autocratic regimes — to address pressing international challenges, most notably in the Middle East.
The opening salvos have been fired. First, Bush worked for a month to pass an intelligence reform bill that will overhaul the Central Intelligence Agency. The bill was modeled on the recommendation of the committee investigating the 9-11 terrorist attacks, and was supported by most Democrats and many Republicans. But it was not supported by DeLay and two key House allies, Reps. Duncan Hunter and James Sensenbrenner, both powerful committee chairmen. House Speaker Dennis Hastert was unable to persuade the malcontents — apparently the majority of House Republicans. Hastert has declared his job is not to pass legislation with a majority of the House members, but with a majority of Republican House members, most of whom are arguably closer to DeLay than Bush. The intelligence bill eventually passed, but the fight was bruising and public.
On the peace process, Bush has signaled he intends to re-engage. This week he announced the US government would provide $20 million in assistance to the Palestinian Authority, intended to help during transition to the post-Arafat era. Bush did not need the consent of Congress, which is good because his move was criticized by DeLay. No action was taken by the majority leader, but the warning was explicitly made that Bush should proceed cautiously. It seems inevitable that should a peace plan be brokered requiring Israel to make sacrifices, Bush will come to loggerheads with DeLay.
It is not surprising that Bush will come to blows with his fellow-Republicans, and it is as much of an executive branch-legislative branch power struggle as it is ideological.
— David Dumke is principal of the Washington-based MidAmr Group.
