Diplomacy in the Hopenchange Era

[The Mad Monk]

Clinton gift gaffe: 'Overcharge'
By DAVID S. CLOUD | 3/6/09 3:58 PM EST
Text Size:

GENEVA—Secretary of State Hillary Clinton opened her first extended talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov by giving him a present meant to symbolize the Obama administration’s vow to “press the reset button” on U.S.-Russia relations.

She handed a palm-sized box wrapped with a bow. Lavrov opened it and pulled out the gift: a red button on a black base with a Russian word peregruzka printed on top.

“We worked hard to get the right Russian word. Do you think we got it?” Clinton asked.

“You got it wrong,” Lavrov said.

Instead of "reset," Lavrov said the word on the box meant “overcharge.”

Clinton and Lavrov laughed.

“We won’t let you do that to us,” she said. Trying to recover, Clinton said the new administration was serious about improving relations with Moscow. “We mean it, and we’re looking forward to it.”

Lavrov said he would put the button on his desk and he and Clinton pushed the button together, before sitting down for their meeting.

A State Department official said the misspelling on the button was being corrected, in time for the post-meeting news conference.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19719.html

[DaShi]

You know, I just saw that and thought, "Which troll on poly will be the first post it?"

[Sirotnikov]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19719.html

as far as I'm aware, the word "peregruzka" is exactly the word used in computer lingo for 'reset'.

so maybe lavrov was a smart-ass.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Barack Obama 'too tired' to give proper welcome to Gordon Brown

Barack Obama's offhand approach to Gordon Brown's Washington visit last week came about because the president was facing exhaustion over America's economic crisis and is unable to focus on foreign affairs, the Sunday Telegraph has been told.

Sources close to the White House say Mr Obama and his staff have been "overwhelmed" by the economic meltdown and have voiced concerns that the new president is not getting enough rest.

British officials, meanwhile, admit that the White House and US State Department staff were utterly bemused by complaints that the Prime Minister should have been granted full-blown press conference and a formal dinner, as has been customary. They concede that Obama aides seemed unfamiliar with the expectations that surround a major visit by a British prime minister.

But Washington figures with access to Mr Obama's inner circle explained the slight by saying that those high up in the administration have had little time to deal with international matters, let alone the diplomatic niceties of the special relationship.

Allies of Mr Obama say his weary appearance in the Oval Office with Mr Brown illustrates the strain he is now under, and the president's surprise at the sheer volume of business that crosses his desk.

A well-connected Washington figure, who is close to members of Mr Obama's inner circle, expressed concern that Mr Obama had failed so far to "even fake an interest in foreign policy".

A British official conceded that the furore surrounding the apparent snub to Mr Brown had come as a shock to the White House. "I think it's right to say that their focus is elsewhere, on domestic affairs. A number of our US interlocutors said they couldn't quite understand the British concerns and didn't get what that was all about."

The American source said: "Obama is overwhelmed. There is a zero sum tension between his ability to attend to the economic issues and his ability to be a proactive sculptor of the national security agenda.

"That was the gamble these guys made at the front end of this presidency and I think they're finding it a hard thing to do everything."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4953523/Barack-Obama-too-tired-to-give-proper-welcome-to-Gordon-Brown.html

That's good governing right there.

[DaShi]

An older man would have perished.

[Unimatrix11]

[...]
I see little room for alliance with Iran, even if we did remove Saddam Hussein, their old worst enemy.[...]

Just to elobarate: Hussein was pushed into war against Iran by the US (it´s not too hard to find pictures of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam, taken during this period), while at the same time, the US sold weapons to Iran, in order to finance some anti-socialist gurilliros in central america (the so-called iran-contra-affair). It´s this kind of crooked policies, that made almost the entire middle east hate the US (the Taliban were built up by the US as well, against the USSR, only then they were called ´mujahedin´). It´s really not startling that Hussein didnt trust the US ever again, and played the same crooked game from then on (to the effect, that we never saw his pledoyers during his trial - he probably had A LOT to tell, that the US didnt want the world to know). Bad morale spreads more easily than a good one. During the 80´s american policy discreditated itself all the way from anatolia to the hindukush for an estimated lifetime. It will take a longer period of honest policies (a decade or so at least) and a lot of woeing for a renewal of trust on the side of the US to fix that. An openly announced bias towards israel does not really help, but is still a lot better than claiming neutrality, while still giving one-sided support (or even supporting both sides for a profit secretly).

[DinoDoc]

Just to elobarate: Hussein was pushed into war against Iran by the US

Liar.

[Unimatrix11]

If you think, that what i am saying, is not true, than call what i said a lie (and possibly eloborate on it), and refrain from personal insults (as i take the word ´liar´).

(i am actually getting sick of having to point out the very basics ´netiquette´ here)

EDIT: From Wikipedia about the first gulf war:

Der Irak genoss im Gegenzug erhebliche diplomatische, militärische und wirtschaftliche Unterstützung seitens der Sowjetunion, Frankreichs sowie Aufklärungsdaten von den Vereinigten Staaten. Er bezog außerdem finanzielle Hilfe von anderen arabischen Staaten (vornehmlich dem ölreichen Kuwait und Saudi-Arabien).

Translation: The Iraq enjoyed considerable diplomatic, military and econmic support from the soviet union, france and surveillance data from the US. It also received financial help from other arabic countries (mainly kuwait [!] and saudi-arabia [!]).

- [!] added by me

Sure, the ambition was Saddam´s, but he was widely encouraged in his ambitions at the time, by (and not only) the US and its allies. How startling that Iran decided to isolate itself after this experience. Buying weapons from the US, they knew best how crooked the whole thing was.

[DinoDoc]

If you think, that what i am saying, is not true, than call what i said a lie (and possibly eloborate on it), and refrain from personal insults (as i take the word ´liar´).

Liars spout lies. I try not to think of people here as being stupid unless they force me to do so. That was the only conclusion I was left with. That's especially true when the historical record is essentially:

The Iran-Iraq War, 1980–88
Iran was the most powerful state in the Persian Gulf during the 1970s. Its strength was partly due to its large population (roughly three times that of Iraq) and its oil reserves, but it also stemmed from the strong support the shah of Iran received from the United States. Relations between Iraq and Iran were quite hostile throughout this period, but Iraq was in no position to defy Iran’s regional dominance. Iran put constant pressure on Saddam’s regime during the early 1970s, mostly by fomenting unrest among Iraq’s sizable Kurdish minority. Iraq finally persuaded the shah to stop meddling with the Kurds in 1975, but only by agreeing to cede half of the Shatt al-Arab waterway to Iran, a concession that underscored Iraq’s weakness.

It is thus not surprising that Saddam welcomed the shah’s ouster in 1979. Iraq went to considerable lengths to foster good relations with Iran’s revolutionary leadership. Saddam did not exploit the turmoil in Iran to gain strategic advantage over his neighbor and made no attempt to reverse his earlier concessions, even though Iran did not fully comply with the terms of the 1975 agreement. Ruhollah Khomeini, on the other hand, was determined to extend his revolution across the Islamic world, starting with Iraq. By late 1979, Tehran was pushing the Kurdish and Shiite populations in Iraq to revolt and topple Saddam, and Iranian operatives were trying to assassinate senior Iraqi officials. Border clashes became increasingly frequent by April 1980, largely at Iran’s instigation.

Facing a grave threat to his regime, but aware that Iran’s military readiness had been temporarily disrupted by the revolution, Saddam launched a limited war against his bitter foe on September 22, 1980. His principal aim was to capture a large slice of territory along the Iraq-Iran border, not to conquer Iran or topple Khomeini. “The war began,” as military analyst Efraim Karsh writes, “because the weaker state, Iraq, attempted to resist the hegemonic aspirations of its stronger neighbor, Iran, to reshape the regional status quo according to its own image.”

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?t=75476

[DinoDoc]

EDIT: From Wikipedia about the first gulf war:

Ok seriously. Are you Oerdin's DL?

From Wikipedia about the Iran–Iraq War:

The war began when Iraq invaded Iran on 22 September 1980 following a long history of border disputes and fears of Shia insurgency among Iraq's long suppressed Shia majority influenced by the Iranian Revolution (mostly known as the Islamic Revolution).

[Unimatrix11]

So what - he still was encouraged and supported to start the war. He thought he had good friends - who then turned out to be really bad ones.

Here is a list of who supplied who during the war:

- Support for BOTH sides: Ethopia, Brazil, Chile, VR China, GDR, France, Italy, North-Korea, Austria, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, USA, USSR and UK.

- Supprt for IRAQ only: Egypt, Belgium, FRG, Jordan, Yugoslawia, Kuwait, Marocco, Pakistan, Philippines, Polan,d Portugal, Saudi-Arabia, Sudan, Tschechoslowakia, Hungary and UAE.

- Support for IRAN only: Algeria, Argentinia, Griece, Israel [!!!], Libya, Mexico, South-Korea, South-Jemen, Syria, Taiwan, Turkey und Vietnam.

It was a great way to get to the oil of the region cheaply (and that the americans made sure of, by patroling the gulf, protecting tankers there), by selling both sides weapons, to prolong the conflict and need for support. A (or two) people(s) dealed by the world this way, are wise not to forget that too soon IMO.

My point is not wether or not Iraq´s attack on Iran was justified, but that it did so under the impression, that the US (among others) would back it up - and then had to find out, that they were actually supporting the enemy as well. I dont tell my neighbor to go ahead and kick his bully neighbor´s a**, and then give that bully a knife. Or at least, if i did that, i should expect that my neighbor wont trust me ever again, once he finds out about it (+ Mr. Bully probably snears at my attitude of profit-no-matter-what and crooketness from the very minute the weapons are sold to him).

[Agathon]

The only issue is the dis of Brown. I can't think of any good reason for that and it could have repercussions beyond Britain.

If he disses Brown, or if he engages in the latest trend of throwing green goo at Peter Mandelson, he'll be popular with the British people. Brown is probably the most despised British Prime Minister in my lifetime, and British politics is in serious disarray.

To be honest, the US could do with better allies than Britain, which is a pretty useless country, all be told.

Well, at least it isn't a liability like Israel.

[Naked Gents Rut]

While not exactly a film buff, Gordon Brown was touched when Barack Obama gave him a set of 25 classic American movies – including Psycho, starring Anthony Perkins on his recent visit to Washington.

Alas, when the PM settled down to begin watching them the other night, he found there was a problem.

The films only worked in DVD players made in North America and the words "wrong region" came up on his screen. Although he mournfully had to put the popcorn away, he is unlikely to jeopardise the special relationship – or "special partnership", as we are now supposed to call it – by registering a complaint.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mandrake/5011941/Gordon-Brown-is-frustrated-by-Psycho-in-No-10.html

Guess we're going to have four more years of Presidential buffoonery for the comics to work with.

[The Mad Monk]

Oh, snap.

[DinoDoc]

While not exactly a film buff, Gordon Brown was touched when Barack Obama gave him a set of 25 classic American movies – including Psycho, starring Anthony Perkins on his recent visit to Washington.

Alas, when the PM settled down to begin watching them the other night, he found there was a problem.

The films only worked in DVD players made in North America and the words "wrong region" came up on his screen. Although he mournfully had to put the popcorn away, he is unlikely to jeopardise the special relationship – or "special partnership", as we are now supposed to call it – by registering a complaint.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-in-No-10.html

I saw that one coming.