There is a saying very widely used and heard everywhere in Turkey which if translated into English, it says, Dirty Arabs. And although Turkey knows the conditions on the ground and how much these negotiations really worth by all the standards of the region, they wanted to appear as peaceful negotiators to win support in the European Union, but Turkey needs to do a lot of things before such a consideration is given. The father of the Turks, Kamal Ataturk, was greatly loved because he succeeded in bringing Turkey from the Eastern to the Western side as for example changing the alphabet, and this explain the Turkish military rjection to Gul with Islamic agenda over Turkish secularism. We remind the Turks of the song to cry one of the greatest Turkish leaders that starts with, dunya, dunya, ylan, dunya.

There is a saying very widely used and heard everywhere in Turkey which if translated into English it says, Dirty Arabs. And although Turkey knows the conditions on the ground and how much these negotiations really worth by all the standards of the region they wanted to appear as peaceful negotiators to win support in the European Union admission, but Turkey needs to do alot of things before such a consideration be given.

Unfortunately, in spite of the best intentions of the Sharm el-Sheikh conference's participants and the generosity of the states offering grants or debt relief, the conference will likely not mark a turning point in Iraq's post-war evolution. That won't happen until Iraq has a truly national government and is broadly comprised and supported by all of Iraq's people.

Since taking office in August 2006, the Maliki government has remained essentially a sectarian government despite its repeated pledges to the contrary. It has not enacted national reconciliation legislation, established mechanisms by which all of Iraq’s peoples can fully participate in the political process, created a framework for sharing Iraq’s oil wealth, or moved to disband and dismantle the nation’s sectarian militias.

Rather, the Maliki government has taken additional steps toward consolidating Shia domination, undermined human rights protections, and evading accountability. The newly released report by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) is particularly revealing. It observes that the Maliki government has “authorized arrests without warrants and the interrogation of suspects without placing a time limit on how long they could be held in pre-trial detention. The use of torture and other inhumane treatment in detention centers under the authority of the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Defense continues to be of utmost concern… [T]he Iraqi Government told UNAMI that it had decided against providing the [mortality] data, although no substantive explanation or justification was provided… UNAMI continued to receive reports of possible collusion between armed militia and Iraqi Special Forces in raids and security operations…” and that there are “ongoing attempts to suppress freedom of expression through tighter control of the broadcast media and printed press.” In short, UNAMI found in Iraq an illiberal sectarian government that is in the formative stages of authoritarianism. The State Department's Office of International Religious Freedom found similar problems in Iraq's current sectarian government.

What Iraq urgently needs is a conference modeled along the lines of the one held in Bonn in December 2001 that paved the way for the creation of a legitimate national Afghan government. The Maliki government is not part of the solution. Instead, it is a big part of the problem. Iraqis with support from the international community will need help in forming a truly national government so that Iraq can have the better future that its people deserves. This difficult but necessary political situation offers perhaps the best chance to bring about a substantial reduction in the violence that is destroying Iraq. Once the violence is substantially reduced, meaningful reconstruction can commence and Iraq can find itself on a path toward robust and sustainable economic growth that is key to its future.

The "emgering regional diplomatic initiative", like the violence and national disintergration that prompted it, is a creature of the US invasion and occupation and stubborn resistance to any meaningful change in the Neo-Con strategic fantasy. That it came about at all is compelling evidence not only of US policy failure but also of US political impotence. The iniative however is doomed to failure. It will die just as Iraq has died, another victim of the great catastrophe. No mulilateral regional initiative can survive continued US occupation of Iraq.

Any student of history has read about the Treaty of Urtecht, Treaty of Versailles, etc., etc.

As a result of these treaties, paradigms shifted: For example, the Treaty of Urtecht ended the 30-year Wars and effectively extinguished the Holy Roman Empire and heralded the rise of the nation state.

Similarly, we need a far reaching resolution of the Middle East grand in magnitute to those achieved earlier.

Ms. Rice is neither a theoretician nor a policy tactician. She has the academic qualifications but I am not privy to her performance academically. We know that she has been ineffective in practice. Reportedly, she studied Soviet Studies, a now defunct discipline, but I never saw any works on the topic by her, unlike other scholars, Jeremy Azrael of the University of Chicago or Dimitry Simes, to name a few. Was Rice a "diversity" candidate???

Condi has a track record of failure. So how is this latest meeting going to get anything done. She can't even get food commerce in and out of Gaza..........The ME is into a spiral of destruction.

Though I somewhat appreciate Debbie Watson's defense of Secretary Rice as illustrated by developments with North Korea, I caution her. We have been here before with North Korea, only to watch it fall apart. I hope the good Secretary's legacy is not solely built upon such feet of clay.

It is now widely agreed that Bush will not be able to use an iron fist to impose his will on the Middle East and that the only successful approach will come from diplomatic negotiations involving all stakeholders including the insurgents. The Uk learned this lesson in Ireland. It realised that after decades of fighting it could not crush its opposition. Peace was brought about by reconciling the parties. Unfortunately, Bush will not convince anybody that he is a changed man. No body will embrace the US after a five minute assurance that the US wants peace and that it will treat Iran, Syria and the insurgents with dignity and respect. This process takes time. Bush has burned his bridges. I suspect that peace will have to come from another source such as Pelosi because she is at odds with Bush and she talks of peace and a withdrawal. This approach would disempower Bush but he has proved to be an erratic, violent and untrustworthy fellow in the eyes of the stakeholders.

It's theater. If Rice proposes something sensible it'll be killed by Cheney. Not just Americans but the entire world is waiting for a new administration in Washington, at best going through the motions of diplomacy without believing for a second that anything can be achieved - except, at best, to gain a little time without something new going awfully wrong. Be it on climate change, Iraq, nuclear proliferation, you name it, with the exception of Kuwait there is not a single country in the world that expects the Bush administration to make the right promises, far less keep them.

Condi has neither the mandate nor the ability to get any tangible results; her trips to the ME are a waste of time-and money; she is no more than a Bush apologist.

The only thing that will change by this meeting is the color of Vampirleeza's eye shadow. Who do you think you're kidding saying it could be a new start for that region! Those hotheads wouldn't even begin to know how to let go of a grudge or even concede for one nano-second that someone else might have a resonable course of action to take. (Kind of reminds me of Baptists and Roman Papists.)Condoleeza is inept, impotent -- that's true no matter how you look at it. What has she ever done to improve the world situation? N-O-T-H-I-N-G! But what is more, she is a woman!
Muslims + Women = Burka. (In her case that might be an improvement; that and a orthodontist.)

Let's not preempty the outcome of the conference. All the nations of the region need a stable Iraq from within and without. The current government in Baqhdad however,is a replica of an entity serving aloneIran's national security interests. Thus, the new Iraq should embody all the components of the Iraqi society dedicated to serving the paramount interests of Iraq. The lasting impact of US foreign policy in the region would be a policy that envisions a united Iraq not under the hegemony of Iran, but an active member of the Arab and Islamic world. Therefore, there is a new paradigm shift in the Arab system from Egypt, as the core power center to the economic power of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under the new bold and visionary leadership of H.R. Highness the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Abdalla bin AbduAziz. Hence, America and others should seize this oppotunity and utilize it for the benefits of a united and democratic Iraq. The US policy makers should welcome and accommodate a more assertive Saudi Arabia in the region and the world, under the new leadership of King Abdalla.This new development is an opportune moment for the West and the nations of the region of the M.E.. In fact, King Abdalla means business and as well has the capacity and capability of delivering the goods. He commands Arab support as examplified by the recent Arab Summit held in Riyadh, the Capital of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In contrast, S/state Condi.,Rice is a well qualified diplomat and the among the best and brightest PR for USA to the whole world. She examplifies the best and brightest spot of America. Further,she is another shinning spot of America, besides Afro- American talents in the spheres of entertainment and sports. I don't know who said,that " America would have been a dark continent characterized by a dull life without the shinning lights of the African -American lion's share of their contrributions in the field of showbiz and sport."

Condi needs to stay with her "husband" Georgie and in the WH. They are both too incompetent for anything else.

Hey Colorado Kool Aid....quit giving my state a bad name with your dumb comments.

If you would take a few minutes to review how Condi was successful in bring N Korea back to the 6-party talks, then you might understand that she has never been no to snap her fingers to make the grand deal.
She flew to Russian, then Japan, S Korea, and China to get them to make agreements in offering tons of food and tons of fuel to help N Korea. She also put pressure on the bank of Macao, to freeze over $20 million of the N Korea funds. All of this was accomplished without fanfare, but it was reported if you took enough time to find it.
You know that trip with Gov. Richardson was arranged by Condi, and he did not fly off on his own like Pelosi and her Shadow Foreign Policy agenda.

Condi is also bringing Israel and the Palestinian leaders together to discuss how to resolve their decades of problems. (Look at the recent power-sharing agreement of Northern Ireland and ask yourself if a 40 year resolution was being considered last year?) No one can ever snap their fingers to handle a international crisis but it would seem as if they must perform all of their work right in front of your noses before you can see for yourselves what has been accomplished.

The author -- and many of the posters it seems -- are high on cannabis if you believe that Iran and Syria have a vested interest in a stable Iraq. This kind of blind-as-a-bat wishful thinking is what impedes the Middle East. There is no real desire for peace -- not in Iraq, certainly not between Muslim and Jew, and believing it is a fool's paradise. Go ahead and blame the U.S., Condi Rice and George Bush -- because it prevents you from seeing the truth about the region. Keep lying to yourselves, but don't expect all of us to believe your lies and trash talk!

Condi Rice is at least SANE and in touch with the real world. There is only so much that she can do, when she reports to GWB who is delusional. Before criticizing her harshly, reflect on what shape our diplomacy would be in if a REAL *lapdog* [Alberto Gonzales comes to mind] were our nation*s Secretary of State.

Would you have linked this "Colin's chance in Egypt" four years ago?

No.

So please change the link to "Rice's chance in Egypt"

Thank you.

I do not trust the people who got us into this mess to get us out.

Kalay WI

Sec. Rice is a brilliant lady. She can do the job if she gets some good people to do her research. State department and the CIA are in old thinking and have to step up to the new world and the ground realities. Once these entities start changing and wear a smart hat things will get better for us.

State Department experts should give the bare raw facts to the Sec. Rice. CIA should provide the regions thinking and the power concentration. Truth and consequences of any action that we may want to take or think about it. How do we get these people to do this?

1. De politicize the State Department
2. CIA should do the job and makes the report as you see it not what the out come you want or some else want. Bare findings of information.
3. To all Presidents appointees now and future should give the congress that they will not politicize the agency.

If we do these then our leaders will have a better understanding and what action we can take and what are the possible results from these actions. We trusted Chalaby who made our President and the defense department less than desirable people to American public today.

As a republican we should make sure the democrats and the republican not to politicize our government departments and courts system. These will create good trust from the American people. Once we have trust in our system then we can prove to the Arabs and other countries in the world we can be trusted and we keep our word. This will make us a better leader and help the countries get out of their mess they are in.

Now to Iraq: The Iraq people have been fighting for the last few hundred years. We cannot go in there and say you all have to live in peace and get along and drink coke. This will not work. Only thing that works is telling them to stay together or split is coming. Look at Bosnia. Look at Kosovo. The splits have brought stability into that region. Why can we split Iraq into Kurds, Sunnis and Shias? Same way they should split Sri Lanka. Ms Rice please wake up and start seeing the ground reality and split Iraq and stop the killing all innocent and my fellow American sons and daughters. There is nothing wrong in splitting and it is the best solution. I do not want any more killing.

Conclusion: in the Sharm el-Sheikh make a statement that USA will not have any objection to split Iraq if the current government has no solution for the internal civil war. This will make the whole world see that we are starting to see the history and ground reality. Good luck to you Ms. Rice.

I hope this visit is a begining of a new respctful way when dealing with arabs, USA is facing major challenges ...failure in Iraq,Iranian threat ... Condy is coming to Middle East calling the help of her allies Egypt And saudia Arabia.......Arabs must take this advantage and take credits from this situation

I hope Sharm El Sheikh the land of peace,there the problem to be solved for a stable middle east
by equalizing power in the region...ensuring as President Hosni mubarak calls.... middle east free nuclear weapon region...including Israel...
A shias sunnis dialogue can benefit Iraq ....protecting civilans,also putting schedule for US troops withdrawal from Iraq.

"Sec. Rice is truly talented and those who paint her as yet another Bush lap-dog reveal some ignorance. Before Bush Jr. ever aspired to high political positions, Rice was making her way as a foreign policy expert, Stanford professor and eventually Provost, and advisor to President Bush Sr. and various counsels and corporations."

With all due respect, Ms. Rice is a former Sovietologist whose academic specialty was rendered useless on January 1, 1992. While Ms. Rice did serve on the National Security Council under Bush 1, she was not a "heavyweight" (nor a "middleweight") on that NSC, and rumors have surfaced that other members of that NSC privately question why/how Ms. Rice was precipitously promoted to NSA after a short and unremarkable NSC tenure.

While I agree that Ms. Rice is not a 'lap-dog,' it is equally disingenuous to portray Rice as an intellectual star with the capability to save this administration from its own foreign policy disasters. Ms. Rice's principal background is in Sovietology and Soviet Foreign Policy, and that knowledge-set is not a useful guide for present predicaments.

Further, Ms. Rice has fostered an appalling diplomatic style: She alerts the Media she's flying to a country, she arrives (often followed by a Press conference), conducts an hour or several-hour-long low-intensity discussion/conversation with foreign diplomats or officials, reiterates the administration's "Talking Points" and offers no legitimate compromises, holds another Press Conference (claiming "progress" and/or "success"), and after Ms. Rice leaves the tarmac the substantive foreign policy issues are never heard from again. Her trips are more similar to Campaign events with Photo-ops or University-Funded "Research Tours" than to the substantive international activities of former Secretaries of State.

While Ms. Rice does not bear any responsibility in pushing for War with Iraq (see Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz/Feith/Kagan et al.), as National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State she has played a principal role in planning and implementing the many 'transformations' of our occupation over 2003-2007 that have unilaterally failed to improve the social, economic or political situation in that country.

Ms. Rice is in way over her head, and while I sympathize to an extent with her predicament (she probably should resign and go back to Academia, where she served admirably, and leave diplomacy for Diplomats), I don't understand why you are in her corner, AH, as far as her capacity as Secretary of State. I urge you to reconsider her relationship to the occupation and attempted "new strategies" (esp. 2005-2006); Ms. Rice had much more influence during this period than you seem aware.

Your writing does contain an important nugget of truth: Ms. Rice probably does not agree with much of the foreign policy this Administration has implemented.

Unfortunately, like Colin Powell during the first term, Ms. Rice has never brought any of those differences before the public or start any type of concerted oppositional campaign. Ms. Rice has chosen to adhere rigidly to the "Democratic Centralist" structure the Bush PR-machine requires (everybody is always "on board and on message," regardless of private reservations). This, of course, goes to the heart of the question: What is a 'lap-dog?'

So I ask you, AH, to contemplate: What good will Ms. Rice's "I would have done it all differently, I swear!" 550-pg. tell-all in February 2009 do for America or Americans, and what foreign policy disaster(s) of the Bush Administration will that book mitigate or solve?

Finally, I find it very naive to think Ms. Rice will change the nation's foreign policy while serving as a lame-duck Secretary of State for a failed President with Iraq heading toward Abyss (and Afghanistan not far behind). It's not a position from which a SecState launches new foreign policy offensives.

Rice has nothing to show for in her six years as, first, the NS Adviser, and now, Secretary of State. She has accomplished nothing, nada, zilch. Her trip to Egypt will be more of the same: photo ops, empty statements, and vague threats.

How effective can she be at this meeting, when, two days before, the State Department issues a report that Iran is a major sponsor of terror? This is hardly the way to open any dialogue with the Iranians.

Rice has been the least effective and one of the most incompetent Secretaries of State in our history.

While I hope for positive results from the upcoming meeting, I do not foresee longlasting agreement without a clear statement by the USA that she will withdraw COMPLETELY [including mercenaries] from Iraq in the near future [say 2 years at most]. It would be suicidal for Syria and IRan to cooperate without assurance that they will not face 140 000 troops, 2-3 carrier groups and 100 000+ mercenaries on their borders while they are called MEMBERS OF THE EVIL AXIS.

5/1/07

Friends:

What is the matter ? West-Asia's godly People cannot make a 'move' without Bush-Condi ?

I know, Isreal has "Bombs", that does not mean 'NO' Gandhi to defuse that 'Bomb' !

Recently, I wrote to Iranian President to show leadership and bring Kurds-Sunni-Shia together, first; then, sit down with Jew to work it out ?

Remember, one-time, long, long ago, Pharisee (now, Jew)-Persian-Arab were Partner(s) in creating own 'god' (that's until Alexander the Great came along- then, more 'gods') leaving the 'poor' Kurds, the "Veda" people in the cold (like you did before to your older-Brothers & teachers of 'Veda' in Bharat)- why not give a try to make it up, like in Europe ?

I think you are quite capable of resolving it yourself; or, if required, ask the good Kurds to assist you (or ask your older-Brothers & teachers in India). Just do not become a 'puppet' to any-one, hoping someone-else will solve your problem !

Mikki

In response to posts above, I have to point out that after four years as National Security Advisor and over two as Secretary of State Rice's skill as a diplomat can be fairly assessed by examining her record in high government office.

Whether or not she was a capable junior staff person in the first Bush administration over 15 years ago or made many friends at Stanford University is irrelevant. Whether she is personable, intelligent, or talented in such other areas as music -- and I have no doubt she is all of these things -- is likewise irrelevant. We know the record of the really talented diplomats who have served as Secretary of State: the Achesons, the Kissingers, the Bakers. We also know Ms. Rice's record. Of people who now contend that over six years in high office is not enough time for her to have demonstrated her skills I have to ask, how much time do we give her?

Condi is in way over her head as Secretary of State. Anything she does in Egypt will be along the lines of a few meaningless handshakes or wordy platitudes, but nothing of substance will happen. She is as much Bush*s poodle as Blair was, and has much less in the way of leadership talent.

It is truly amazing how fast we all forget how the threat of Saddam Hussein dominated mid-east politics prior to his overthrow. Now the main threat seems to have evolved into a resurgence of an ancient religious rivalry. The only thing that hasn't changed much is the antipathy in that region for the United States.

One might argue that the influence of the U.S. has decreased in that region as a result of the fall of Saddam, but of course the opposite is really true. No matter what you think about the Iraq conflict, the presence of 140,000 troops definitely means U.S. influence has increased dramatically.

The main strategic issue for this conference is exactly how do we handle "failed states" in the future? The rise of militant Islam is but one of a series of global threats that need to addressed by the global community. What those threats all have in common is that they prey on failed states.

...and one other thing is for sure: There are more of these failed states coming in the Middle East...

Meeting Condi have never been the tunring point for anyone. That gal is still a virgin.

I realize that we have to blame everything on the Bush administration, and I don't generally defend them, but you can't uniformly blame the failure of diplomacy on the diplomat.

All of the leaders in the region know that they gain credibility by talking tough against the US. They lose this mass-appeal when they cooperate. We assume also, all of a sudden, that these nations have a genuine interest in a secure Iraq.

"Diplomacy" is a great thing to talk about. If you don't like war, but don't want to concede that states should be able to do what they want, it's kind of what you're stuck with. I certainly don't agree with the Bush administration's policy of not negotiating with certain states. Still, I wish people would stop talking about the need to engage people and start talking about what they need to be engaged to do.

I think Condi should run for king.

I hope that the authors are right regarding the opportunities posed by this gathering. I would like to comment on the remarks posted about Sec. Rice. While I am no fan of the Bush administration, and am saddened that Bush and his apointees have proved so incompetent over time, Sec. Rice is truly talented and those who paint her as yet another Bush lap-dog reveal some ignorance. Before Bush Jr. ever aspired to high political positions, Rice was making her way as a foreign policy expert, Stanford professor and eventually Provost, and advisor to President Bush Sr. and various counsels and corporations. I know people who have worked with her directly. Perhaps as she gains influence in the twighlight of the disastrous Bush presidency, and independence from the Cheney circle, she will be able to do some good. I just had to correct the misunderstandings in the posts above.

Another paid all inclusive trip for Condi! Thank you for doing nothing and having no diplomatic skills at all. Thank you for failing to bring allies into the Iraqi development and reconstruction! Enjoy the cous cous

Can we believe that the nations gathering for this meeting have any vested interest in what Condi has to say? These trips by Condi has resulted in nothing. All it serves is gets her out of hot air in Washington. Out of sight out of mind. She has no training or the knowledge of the region, people, or their values. Nice try, however!!

Any attempt to engage the Bush administration in the worthy pragmatic proposals put forth by Yaşar Yakiş and the cadre of co-authors, will fail. Given Rice's dismal track record in Middle Eastern and other international negotiations it is more reasonable to assume that she will derail the conference by turning it into a forum on Iran's nuclear ambitions and development activities. Recognizing this in advance, and understanding that Bush and his administration appreciate the value of torture, the attending dignitaries should discuss these worthy recommendations with Rice on the water board.

This assumes that everyone does not like the status quo. Everyone gets to kill Americans. Americans keep each sides' opponents from killing too many of them. Bush gets to pretend he has not failed. Turkey gets to abuse their Kurds without a refuge. Iran gets to expand its sphere of influence. Jordan, Syria, and Saudi get to support the insurgents on the QT. And the price is a mere 100 fantastic young Americans killed per month. Cheap to the people of the region at any price. The point that Rice is not a skilled diplomat is a good one. To the Bushies, the model of a diplomat is Chamberlin. Every diplomatic contact is another Munich to be avoided. One of the few amusements of the reign of George II is to watch his VP, SecState, SecDef travel the world, meet with our "allies" and watch our "allies" rush to the cameras to brag how they have rejected whatever it was our representatives came to get them to agree to.

I have to agree about Rice. She has shown no talent or ability in any of the positions she has held. She has no knowledge of the region, the dynamics, the history or personalities of the players. She is not inquisitive by nature or inclination.

The authors lay out a plausible course of action. They do not, however, discuss a basic consideration that ought to give everyone some concern.

This is that Sec. Rice is not that talented a diplomat. I'd like it if this did not make a big difference, but I'm afraid in such a complex situation it probably will. In the United States Rice has celebrity status, both because she is a black woman -- the first to occupy a senior Cabinet post -- and because she is known to be personally close to the President (the Washington press corps, made up of journalists heavily reliant on their own access to government officials, is prone to give great weight to how easily an official can get in to see his or her superior).

But being a celebrity does not make one able to handle complicated negotiations, let alone several complicated negotiations happening at the same time. Time and again over the course of her six-plus years in as National Security Advisor and Secretary of State, Rice has made visits to gatherings of world leaders, gotten great visuals, and stuck rigidly to talking points prepared beforehand. That won't get us anywhere at Sharm el-Sheikh, but I fear it is all Rice is capable of.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice should use the Sharm el-Sheikh gathering to demonstrate Washington's new commitment to Freedom and Equality... people can see she is not free to be herself and still have a job and still be admired for what beauty she has. Wear and AFRO, straigten out Bush. it's the only way to show the world that you are accepted for the content of your charactor - not how euro you look or how indoctrinated you are. btw: are sheites supposed to dress like sunnis or kurds to be accepted as *equals* or are sunnis and kurds supposed to wear the clothes and take on the lanquage and religion of the sheites?