Time is expiring for Bush’s legacy

Published 10:47 pm Monday, January 21, 2008

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration is beginning its last year in office by quietly scaling back its foreign-policy ambitions as it struggles with new obstacles and rapidly dwindling influence.

Only a few months ago, senior officials predicted that before their exit, they could deliver a Middle East peace deal that had eluded so many predecessors. But early this month, as President Bush toured Israel and the West Bank, officials made clear that the deal he’s now talking about is not a long-awaited final agreement but a preliminary pact aimed at setting the terms for talks.

As well, the administration’s efforts to rid North Korea and Iran of nuclear ambitions have suffered deflating setbacks in recent weeks. And while the administration’s greatest challenge, Iraq, has seen encouraging security improvements, the ultimate goal of Iraqi political reconciliation remains far off.

The upshot is that the Bush administration is going to be spending this year managing crises and tidying up messes to pass along to the next president, rather than reaching legacy milestones, as officials recently had hoped. When speaking in public these days about their record, Bush administration officials talk little about diplomatic breakthroughs and more about laying sound diplomatic foundations for those who come after them.

That shift reflects how little time Bush has left and how much work remains.

“It’s becoming clear that they’re not going to be able to achieve that much in the time that remains, and they’re simply having to adjust their ambitions,” said Gary Samore, a former government nonproliferation expert now at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Too little too late?

The administration’s foreign-policy team had high hopes in 2007 that in the final stretch of their bruising eight years, they could eke out achievements to help offset the damage to the Bush record, much of it resulting from calamities in Iraq and elsewhere. But in at least some instances, the efforts came after years of inaction, hobbling chances of success.

Reviving Middle East peace talks has been a recent top priority. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited the region eight times last year and held out hope of a final peace deal by the end of this year.

But in December and January, as preliminary talks between Israelis and Palestinians got off to a rancorous start, U.S. officials began making clear that their aim was now less ambitious. And Rice said in a December interview that the goal sought in the Middle East is “a foundation” that can be passed “from one administration to another.”

In another push, the foreign-policy team that largely replaced a more hawkish Bush squad during his second term braved scorn from the political right by seeking a controversial diplomatic opening to North Korea.

But long-stalled talks also involving South Korea, Japan, China and Russia have since stumbled with Pyongyang’s apparent unwillingness to disclose all of the parts of its nuclear program. Administration officials consider this declaration essential; unless the United States knows what Pyongyang’s program included, it is impossible to judge their compliance and move forward, they said.

Likewise, administration officials say they continue to work with allies to apply pressure on Iran to halt its uranium enrichment efforts, which U.S. officials fear is aimed at developing a bomb.

But the effort to pressure Tehran was set back last month by a U.S. intelligence report that found Iran had suspended nuclear weapons work in 2003. The report, by convincing many Americans that the threat is not imminent, has made it much harder for the administration to credibly threaten the use of military action. That, in turn, has taken punch out of Western diplomatic efforts.

Victories in jeopardy

Some issues once considered likely foreign-policy victories now are in question.

Administration officials hailed their agreement with India to help advance New Delhi’s civil nuclear program as one of their top foreign-policy achievements. The deal would allow American companies to sell technology to India, which in exchange would open up its civilian reactors to international inspectors.

Now, however, the agreement is stalled by leftist opponents in the Indian legislature who believe India should not abandon the goal of strategic independence from the United States.

And in Afghanistan, the Pentagon’s proposal to add 3,200 Marines to its force of about 27,000 is an acknowledgment of an increasing threat in the Afghanistan conflict. America’s NATO allies would prefer to reduce their troop commitment there, and some allied diplomats have talked about ways to scale back Western ambitions for the overall mission.