It was easy to respect Condoleezza Rice from a distance, prior to the Bush years. After all, here is a determined, accomplished, articulate, poised and seemingly brilliant woman. Yet, so many of her public statements over the past seven years simply make no sense, or worse.
Secretary Rice has a frightening capacity to look questioners in the eye, reference them by first name, cite specific but tangential facts with great accuracy, and speak softly, firmly and with exacting elocution. However, this gift dangerously masks that what she says often signifies nothing, lacks common sense and is riddled with tortured logic and intended deception.
Condi met with her Spanish counterpart in Madrid last Friday to discuss Cuba, among other sensitive subjects. Spain has long recognized the Castro regime, even during the nadir of Franco's virulent anticommunism. As a result, Spain and others such as France, Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom have been long investing in Cuba while we continue to impose a ridiculous embargo that has only worked to solidify Castro's' tenure over five decades. As is well known, the embargo exists solely to placate right-wing Cuban-American interests in Florida and to secure the electoral votes they represent.
The Financial Times tell us that Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos politely reminded Condi last week that U.S. isolation of Cuba remains an act of demonstrable futility. The Secretary of State responded, "I have real doubts about the value of engagement with a regime that is anti-democratic and that is trying to secure the transition of one regime to the next anti-democratic regime." Hello?
This is an astonishing statement that will, nonetheless, probably go unchallenged as it floats along in a roiling sea littered with similarly absurd rhetoric. Condi must understand that her statement describes leading American allies such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia perfectly well and Pakistan and many of the other "stans" reasonably well. Egyptian President Mubarak is engaged in the very dynastic succession planning with his son that Condi uses as an excuse in Cuba. Of course, the House of Saud is masterful at such anti-democratic dynastic politics. Does Condi simply believe we are not smart enough to make these basic connections or that we fail to recognize the long U.S. history of engagement with - if not creation of - anti-democratic and dynastic regimes? Her statement is breathtaking.
The David Samuel's story on Secretary Rice in the June issue of The Atlantic Magazine is eye-popping. When asked to name a book that has influenced her thinking about the Middle East, Condi evaded the question, suggested she was really an "aural learner" and then finally mentioned having read a U.N. Human Development Report on patent law. This from a leader who naively pushed for Palestinian elections and, when she didn't like the miserable Hamas-led outcome, turned her back on democracy. Go figure.
Secretary Rice has a frightening capacity to look questioners in the eye, reference them by first name, cite specific but tangential facts with great accuracy, and speak softly, firmly and with exacting elocution. However, this gift dangerously masks that what she says often signifies nothing, lacks common sense and is riddled with tortured logic and intended deception.
Condi met with her Spanish counterpart in Madrid last Friday to discuss Cuba, among other sensitive subjects. Spain has long recognized the Castro regime, even during the nadir of Franco's virulent anticommunism. As a result, Spain and others such as France, Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom have been long investing in Cuba while we continue to impose a ridiculous embargo that has only worked to solidify Castro's' tenure over five decades. As is well known, the embargo exists solely to placate right-wing Cuban-American interests in Florida and to secure the electoral votes they represent.
The Financial Times tell us that Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos politely reminded Condi last week that U.S. isolation of Cuba remains an act of demonstrable futility. The Secretary of State responded, "I have real doubts about the value of engagement with a regime that is anti-democratic and that is trying to secure the transition of one regime to the next anti-democratic regime." Hello?
This is an astonishing statement that will, nonetheless, probably go unchallenged as it floats along in a roiling sea littered with similarly absurd rhetoric. Condi must understand that her statement describes leading American allies such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia perfectly well and Pakistan and many of the other "stans" reasonably well. Egyptian President Mubarak is engaged in the very dynastic succession planning with his son that Condi uses as an excuse in Cuba. Of course, the House of Saud is masterful at such anti-democratic dynastic politics. Does Condi simply believe we are not smart enough to make these basic connections or that we fail to recognize the long U.S. history of engagement with - if not creation of - anti-democratic and dynastic regimes? Her statement is breathtaking.
The David Samuel's story on Secretary Rice in the June issue of The Atlantic Magazine is eye-popping. When asked to name a book that has influenced her thinking about the Middle East, Condi evaded the question, suggested she was really an "aural learner" and then finally mentioned having read a U.N. Human Development Report on patent law. This from a leader who naively pushed for Palestinian elections and, when she didn't like the miserable Hamas-led outcome, turned her back on democracy. Go figure.