In an administration that has made clear from the beginning that dissent is not allowed, it cannot come as any surprise that the only dissenting voice of the administration has at last been snuffed out. And for a president who only hears what he wants to hear, it is also no surprise that Condoleezza Rice is replacing Secretary of State Powell. Powell, the first African-American secretary of state, announced his resignation Monday, amid sorrow and jubilation. Ironically for this Republican administration, it is the conservative bloc rejoicing while nervous liberals welcome Powell into our midst to share our motley array of emotions: defeat, dissent and uncertainty.
Powell, from the beginning, was the most publicly beloved member of the administration, an honorable military man who deserved and received everyone's respect. Even Democrats acknowledged his appointment to secretary of state as wise. What puzzled observers after the appointment, however, was the repeated disregard for Powell's voice in policy. Of course, the battle lines were never so clearly drawn as in the buildup to Iraq. On one side, Powell stood alone, the voice of reason, and on the other side, the administration stood with turned backs. Many newspapers, both domestic and foreign, described the real war in Iraq as between Powell and the unholy trio: Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, and then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. It's clear who lost that war.
Upon Bush's re-election, it was reported that Powell was optimistic about a change in foreign policy to less divisive and more constructive issues, such as the Iranian nuclear question and the abandoned road map in the Middle East. Powell was both a proponent of the United States working with the European Union to negotiate with Iran, and, as contributor to the written road map, was ready to rejuvenate talks between Israelis and Palestinians. Powell was also determined to bring in more U.N. and EU support for Iraq, since the State Department post-conflict plan he originally presented was ignored by the administration. As fighting moves out of Fallujah into Mosul, with no sign of the insurgency letting up, one might think the administration would be regretting its rejection of that plan, but apparently not.
As for Powell's replacement, let's just say that if the Bush administration is analogous to a scary, dysfunctional family, then Rice has long desired to wear the pants in it. She's been close to Bush since the beginning, and far from merely being a-yes-woman, many consider her to be the brains behind Bush's ideological operation. Traditionally, the State Department and the White House engage in a bureaucratic tug of war that allows each to balance and compromise the desires of the other, but with Rice firmly grounded in the White House, many anticipate State Department hostilities and a significant decrease in the State Department's role in foreign policy. Powell, seen as the hero and champion of the State Department, is already missed there, which indicates that Rice might not have the warmest of welcomes (and with reason). This administration has repeatedly ignored the recommendations of the State Department, brushing off the agency's long-term outlook in favor of Bush's short-term gratification, i.e. Iraq. Powell at least lent his ear to the department's legitimate concerns, doing his best to lobby for them; Rice might well turn deaf ears to the situation altogether.
Speaking of deaf ears, it is not just the State Department and optimistic liberals mourning Powell's resignation: the world does as well. Third world countries, particularly in Africa, have benefited from and appreciated Powell's willingness to engage with them and listen to their concerns. Before Powell's February 2003 testimony to the United Nations, even the Arab world viewed Powell as an impartial, sympathetic ear of the administration. In fact, one might argue he has been the only ear in an administration full of mouthpieces.
Most importantly though, and most disappointingly, the departure of Powell indicates, more clearly than words, that the Bush administration has no regrets about any of its policy. Powell leaving and Rumsfeld hanging on says that there was no mistake in Iraq, that we'd do it again, even if we had a second chance, with no shame and no apology. The Bush administration, by choosing Rice, also says that there is no place for dissent. Far from encouraging compromise or moderation, let alone unity, the cabinet reorganization is merely highlighting the division between those who agree with Bush policy and those who don't. Powell didn't agree with the administration sometimes, and now he's gone. His voice has been snuffed out, and with it goes any hope of reining in Bush's "mandate"
