TIME: Almanac 1990/1990 Time Magazine Compact Almanac, The (1991)(Time).iso/time/092589/09258900.052

Text File | 1990-09-18 | 5.3 KB | 96 lines

NATION, Page 22

Vision Problems at State . . .

Critics say James Baker has no consistent policies

By Christopher Ogden


    It may be a great place for a powwow -- but a superpower
rendezvous? This week's meeting between Secretary of State James
Baker and Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze takes place
not in Washington or New York City but Wyoming's remote Grand Teton
National Park, a glorious setting and a logistical nightmare. At
a modern-day campsite near Jackson Hole, advance men have hauled
in satellite dishes, encryption machines, secure telephones,
simultaneous-translation systems, crates of computers, hundreds of
pounds of barbecue and a gift box of hand-tooled cowboy boots.

    Between talks on arms control and arrangements for a
Bush-Gorbachev summit, Baker wants Shevardnadze to experience a
different America at a Saturday cookout and Western hoedown. The
informal atmosphere, he hopes, will enhance their rapport. The
scenario is vintage Baker: relaxed on the surface, complex beneath.

    When George Bush appointed his friend of 30 years to run the
State Department, there was speculation that Baker might actually
function as an unofficial Deputy President. A former Treasury
Secretary, White House chief of staff and three-time presidential
campaign chairman, Baker was expected to be the power next to the
throne. That conjecture has so far been wrong.

    After eight months in his mahogany-paneled office overlooking
the Lincoln Memorial, First Friend Baker is not even running
foreign policy -- the President handles that. After a rocky start
in a new field, the legendary political operative is still taking
lumps from critics who argue he is quick to cut a deal, such as the
bipartisan accord on Nicaragua, but slow to present a consistent
strategy for critical areas like Eastern Europe and the Middle
East.

    The criticism comes from both left and right. "To provide
leadership, you can't just respond to circumstances, you have to
create them," says Senator Alan Cranston, the liberal California
Democrat and Foreign Relations Committee veteran. Frank Gaffney,
director of the conservative Center for Security Policy, thinks
that Baker "believes in success for its own sake and often finds
specific goals inconvenient. That's not leadership or vision." Even
Shevardnadze took a shot last week, complaining that "the
restrained, indecisive position of the American Administration" has
led to a "peculiar lull" in arms control.

    Foreign service professionals have loudly criticized their boss
for freezing them out and surrounding himself with longtime aides.
"He's running a mini-NSC, not State," complained a senior diplomat.
"We learn what our policy is when we read it in the newspapers."

    Yet Baker announced from the outset that he intended to be the
President's man at State and not State's man at the White House.
If U.S. foreign policy lacks vision, the shortcoming may stem less
from Baker than from Bush, who reacts better than he anticipates.

    Faulted early on for dithering over Mikhail Gorbachev's peace
offensive, the Administration is now accused of being too passive
about opportunities in Eastern Europe. In response, Bush last week
doubled U.S. emergency food aid for Poland to $100 million. After
presenting an early blueprint for Arab-Israeli negotiations, Baker
has moved back to the Middle East sidelines. The U.S. has also
miscalculated in Cambodia, backing Prince Norodom Sihanouk, who is
willing to work with the murderous Khmer Rouge, instead of the
Hanoi-backed Hun Sen regime, which is rebuilding the country.

    But there have been brighter spots. Baker won plaudits for the
Central American plan that demobilizes the contras. "He handled it
well," said Kansas Republican Senator Nancy Kassebaum. "It was
fuzzy enough for everyone to find a niche." Policy toward South
Africa is on hold until new President F.W. de Klerk shows his hand,
but the Administration has been tougher on apartheid. "Baker is
much more positive on South Africa than Reagan," said Illinois
Democrat Paul Simon, who chairs the Senate's Africa subcommittee.
Baker also fine-tuned the cautious U.S. response to the Tiananmen
Square massacre, pressing Bush for additional sanctions after
sensing the depth of outrage in Congress.

    If Baker has not become the President's prime minister, he has
retained his role as counselor. He and Bush meet privately twice
a week for sessions that range well beyond foreign affairs. But
Baker carefully avoids meddling in the domestic agenda. Instead,
he has settled in with Defense Secretary Dick Cheney and National
Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft to form the most collegial team
since the three worked together in the Ford presidency. They gather
each Wednesday in Scowcroft's office and coordinate throughout the
week. Deferring to Baker, the more experienced Scowcroft seems
content to be First Facilitator -- and closer to the Oval Office.

    If the triumphs have so far been small, neither have there been
any large mistakes. The sniping is likely to lessen if the spirit
of Jackson Hole picks up the pace of U.S.-Soviet relations. In the
meantime, Baker ignores the grumbling, particularly from his own
department. If the professional diplomats were so smart, he
muttered last week, why hadn't they thought of inviting
Shevardnadze to Wyoming?