In the run-up to today’s unveiling of the administration’s revised policy on Sudan, there was a great deal of dust raised regarding what the policy might consist of and how it would be explained. I posted the joint announcement by Secretary Clinton, Ambassador Rice, and Special Envoy Gration at Still4Hill, and I encourage you to take the time to watch and listen.
Perhaps the most notable earmark of the morning’s presentation was what we did not hear. We did not hear details about incentives or disincentives, and we did not hear any betrayal of disagreement among the players – which, as I said in the prior post was a huge concern of mine. In the end, though, I am not unhappy about the way this played out for a few reasons:
First and foremost, the characterization of the genocide in Darfur as ongoing: It is not over, and we are not saying it is over. Hillary referred to conditions “on the ground” as a prime indicator of progress toward the goals. That is a condition that must stop, and I think the policy is firm on that.
Although I was very apprehensive about Hillary making this “unity” demonstration, she was masterful in doing it to the point that I almost think it was her idea. She showed authority, determination, and collegiality. It was not an empty gesture, and Hillary emerged whole.
Are there gaps and gray areas? Yup! Did she explain why the vagueness? Sure did. And reading it is nothing like hearing her say why. The Head Homegirl has a very authoritative way of delivering even that message that makes it somehow acceptable. Was there transparency? Not a lot. On the whole, though, I think they did a good job – especially the Homegirls – I always root for the Homegirls.
Leave a comment