US President George W. Bush's announcement to replace his Secretary of State, Colin Powell, who resigned on Monday, with Condoleeza Rice, a foreign policy hawk, will come as a disappointment to many who expected the second Bush administration to be less inclined to project America's raw power abroad. Like Pakistan's Foreign Minister, Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri, described him, "Powell has been a sane and reasonable voice in international affairs." He was known to seek a more proactive US role for the implementation of the Middle East peace roadmap, and to oppose the invasion of Iraq. But the pro-Zionist neo-con clique, comprising Vice President Dick Cheney, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his underlings Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Pearl and a few others, had sidelined the State Department.
They encouraged Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to throw away the roadmap and unleash a campaign of reoccupation and state terrorism in the Palestine territories. And, of course, they also designed the plan for Washington's immoral and illegal occupation of Iraq, which, as per their stated goal, was to change the Middle East map and protect America's friends [Israelis]. Perhaps, Powell's only success during the run-up to the Iraq invasion was that he was able to convince Bush to go to the UN to make a case for war.
Despite his disagreement on such important issues, Powell stayed on as the Secretary of State, raising questions about his own convictions. His critics rightly wondered if the Defence Department or the Vice President had a more effective role in shaping the foreign policy than the State Department under him, why didn't he quit? Perhaps, he hoped that at some stage he would be able to assert himself and bring about a change in policy that he deemed appropriate. Which is why, it would appear, he had started to distance himself from what the neo-cons were doing, publicly admitting that he had made the case for war in his memorable UN speech on the basis of flawed intelligence information.
Frustrated, Powell had also let it be known some time ago that he would not be a part of the second Bush administration. Yet, according to a press report, he had revised his decision recently and indicated a willingness to stay on the condition that the new administration would allow him to deal with certain issues in his own way.
Among other things, he had wanted to take a tough line with Sharon and to resolve his country's nuclear tiff with Iran through engagement. It is sad but not surprising that Bush did not accept these conditions.
After all, he has not indicated any intention to change his extremely controversial Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, who is commonly blamed for much of what has gone wrong for the US in Iraq.
As the National Security Advisor in the first Bush administration, Condoleeza Rice is not known to have made any distinct contribution to policy making, though she is close to the neo-conservative circle of hawks. And of course the president is not famous for his expertise in international affairs.
He will continue to rely on whatever advice she and her neo-con colleagues are going to offer him. Which means, until the Iraq project becomes a complete disaster, there is little hope of a change in US policy on Iraq or the Middle East peace process.
So far as US policy towards Pakistan is concerned, Foreign Minister Kasuri has correctly described it as being based on "...mutual need and mutual interest." The US needs this country for the promotion of its own interest in the region, and hence the present policy is not expected to undergo any significant change after Powell's departure. Changes for some others will come after the people of Iraq have finished doing what they are doing now: teaching a sobering lesson to the Washington Warriors.
The likely failure of the Iraq project may ultimately force Washington to conclude that engagement with defiant small nations such as Iraq, Iran and North Korea as well as the oppressed Palestinian people needs to be preferred over the present policy of aggression, 'pre-emptive' invasion and occupation.