Summits, summits everywhere…

Washington Times reports two summits happening for the benefit of Iraq in the next few weeks. One in Egypt on May 3rd for the “Arab Street” and one in the White House for the Democrat leadership next week.

From WashTimes David Sands, Iraqi hopes are pinned to the outcome of their Egypt meeting;

“It would be a real slap in the face” if the May 3 gathering at the Egyptian resort city of Sharm el Sheik failed to produce concrete offers, Ibrahim Gambari, the U.N. undersecretary-general overseeing the Iraq-reconstruction program, said in an interview Tuesday with The Washington Times.
    “It could undermine the vision of [Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri] al-Maliki and his government to take the steps needed to restore Iraq’s economy,” the veteran Nigerian diplomat added.
    Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh warned on a Washington visit yesterday that Iran is ready to expand its clout inside Iraq if Arab rivals like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Kuwait fail to support Iraq’s economic recovery.
    “If the Arab countries do not step up, Iran’s influence in Iraq will grow,” Mr. al-Dabbagh said. 

Later on in the story, Sands tells us that the US and the “Paris Club” are forgiving substantial portions Iraq’s $120 billion debt, but the Arabs aren’t so forthcoming on forgiving the debts of their Arab neighbor.

Isn’t that what started this mess in the first place? I remember Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990 because he was deeply indebted to his Arab brothers after fighting off the Iranians and preventing the spread of fundamentalism throughout the Gulf region. Kuwait wouldn’t give him any concessions or breaks on repayment so he took their oilfields (a REAL war for oil). Well, I guess no one has ever accused the Arabs of learning from history.

The other summit, according to Joseph Curl and S.A. Miller, is the meeting in the White House that President offered to the Democrats the other day and they spent all day yesterday feigning outrage that the President was sticking to his principles rather than caving in to their $20 billion graft-ridden defense supplemental bill.

  “We will listen to his position, but in return we will insist that he listen to concerns of the American people that his policies in Iraq have failed and we need to change course,” they said.
    Earlier in the day, Mr. Reid balked when the White House announced that the Nevada Democrat had agreed to attend the meeting and discuss the $100 billion war-funding bill that Mr. Bush has vowed to veto.
    Reid spokesman Jim Manley had said the Nevada Democrat would rebuff offers to talk until he gets “a signal from the White House that they are prepared to drop their demand that this meeting is a listening session only and this meeting will not include negotiations.”
    Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, also began the day declining Mr. Bush’s invitation — reiterating the stance the leaders took Tuesday after the White House characterized Congress’ role in the meeting as listeners not negotiators.
    There was no indication from the White House last night that the president had altered the terms of his invitation.

I guess the Democrats workshopped their response and found out they’d be holding the brown end of the stick. That “concerns of the American” people crap is wearing a little thin. I’ll say it one more time for those of you not paying attention; if you spoke for the American people, we would have elected enough of you that you wouldn’t have to worry about the President’s veto.

I hope whichever way these meetings break, it’s in the best interest of the iraqi people – who really do need a break from all of this posturing and politicking.

Category: Foreign Policy, Historical, Politics