James Baker was President George Bush Senior’s secretary of state between 1989-92. Much as I admire Colin Powell, I think that James Baker has been America’s most successful secretary of state for at least twenty-five years. He understood to an impressive extent the highly complex and confused problems of the Middle East. The exemplary way the White House handled the war to liberate Kuwait is a constant reminder just how badly the present administration has performed over the 2003 invasion of Iraq and its disgraceful and deplorable aftermath.
James Baker represented a wiser and more enlightened approach to international relations. In The Politics of Democracy (1995) James Baker wrote:
“Diplomatically, pressing on to Baghdad would have caused not just a rift but an earthquake within the coalition. Had we opted for this approach, we would never have been in a position to create a meaningful peace process because we would have lost the Arab members of the coalition.”
He also warned that such an attack on the Iraqi capital risked strengthening the position of Iran and weakening the considerable diplomatic support for America. He was alarmed at the possible splintering of Iraq which could ignite a civil war. I hope the American public now recognizes how prudent and far-sighted their secretary of state was at the time.
It was the White House under President George Bush Senior that decided to postpone the $10 billion loan guarantee to Israel to help settle the wave of Jewish immigrants from Russia. This was a fine but all too rare example of the White House plucking up the courage and determination to stand up to Israel and its frighteningly effective lobby in Washington.
James Baker played a crucial role in bringing the various parties to the T-shaped table in the opulent Spanish Royal Palace in Madrid in 1991 after the Gulf War. There Arab and Israeli delegates faced each other for the first time in 43 years.
After stepping down as Secretary of State James Baker became the chief of staff and senior counselor to the president in 1992.
With such a background it was no surprise that he was extremely cautious over the invasion of Iraq in 2003. He declared diplomatically before it: “We should try our best not to have to go it alone, and the president should reject the advice of those who counsel doing so.”
He described the invasion beforehand as:
“a war of choice, more so, perhaps, than a war of necessity.”
Once again his judgment has been proved right, and he helped behind the scenes to persuade the administration to go along with Prime Minister Tony Blair and seek the backing of the United Nations Security Council.
A few weeks ago James Baker became co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group with Lee Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman. This group, a congressional task force, is not going to go over the row about invading Iraq in 2003 but to suggest ideas for the way forward. Other members of the Group include Rudy Giuliani, the much respected former mayor of New York and Robert Gates, a former CIA director. James Baker’s new job attracted little publicity but I suggest it could be highly significant. James Baker is on record as saying: “Any appearance of a permanent occupation will... play directly into the hands of those in the Middle East who suspect us of imperial design.”
A far as I know America is still planning to maintain strategic bases in Iraq, to protect Israel, after the coalition forces have been withdrawn.
The next presidential election in America is in 2008, and obviously the administration will want to get all its servicemen — except those in the strategic bases — out of the country well before then, if at all possible.
