Snow’s dissembling on diplomats

Following yesterday’s front-page revelations about Karl Rove’s office offering detailed political briefings to diplomats and officials who help shape the administration’s international affairs, Tony Snow did his level best to argue the briefings were irrelevant.

Q: Could you offer some reaction to the story today that members of the diplomatic corps got briefings about the administration’s election goals? What’s the value of those briefings, and is it a politicization of —

SNOW: Not really. You’ve got political appointees getting political briefings. I’m shocked. Shocked.

Q: What’s the value of it, though, from a diplomatic mission?

SNOW: Well, look, a lot of times — I’m not sure the — let me put this way: To be briefed on what the goals of an administration are, if you are a representative of the administration, is useful. If you’re going to be — when you’re in the Nation’s Capital, you’re not only dealing with one-on-one issues, but you’re also representing the government. It’s perfectly legitimate for the White House to say, here are our goals, here are our objectives, this is what your executive branch is doing.

Q: What about the idea that politics should end at the water’s edge?

SNOW: Well, the fact is that this does not mean that they’re out churning for votes, they’re not doing fundraisers abroad. This is simply a briefing and I daresay that this is hardly unusual in this administration.

Given the political climate and recent events, this is probably a one-day scandal, but Snow’s response annoyed me.

Snow said, for example, that the political briefings for diplomats let officials know “what [the] executive branch is doing.” That’s absurd. The briefings were detailed reports and slide-shows about specific congressional races. By Snow’s reasoning, the U.S. Ambassador to Sweden needs to know what Karl Rove thinks about Sen. Frank Lautenberg’s (D) prospects in New Jersey next year. A middle manager at the Peace Corps should appreciate Rove’s concerns about whether Sen. Max Baucus (D) is seeking re-election in Montana. A USAID official concerned with sub-Saharan Africa should see Rove’s slides about Florida’s 12th congressional district.

That, in Snow’s words, is “perfectly legitimate.”

Snow added that these briefings are “hardly unusual in this administration.” But that’s the point; they should be unusual. It’s why no other modern White House has ever even tried to politicize diplomats and ambassadors this way.

“That just didn’t happen. Frankly, I am shocked to hear it,” said former senator James Sasser (D-Tenn.), who served as President Bill Clinton’s ambassador to China in the late 1990s. “I’m one who strongly believes that politics ought to end at the water’s edge.”

James Dobbins, who was an ambassador in the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, said that some senior diplomats and State Department officials come from political backgrounds and stay informed through back channels.

But Dobbins, who rose through the Foreign Service ranks, said that he never attended an organized meeting for political appointees.

“I don’t know of any methodical effort to inform presidential appointees of the state of play in the domestic political arena,” he said.

Snow tried to dismiss this with sarcasm, but some people really were “shocked.”

Political briefings given by Bush White House aides to high-ranking diplomats “were probably inappropriate,” Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said Tuesday. […]

Lugar, who chaired the committee when Republicans controlled the Senate, said in an interview that the ambassadors’ briefings “may have given an impression of a political organization continuing on while they were involved in their embassy posts. All things considered, I would prefer the briefings had not occurred.”

Lugar said the briefings seemed unnecessary because “the information that apparently was provided is available to us each day in political newsletters.”

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden, D-Del., said in a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice: “I do not understand why ambassadors, in Washington on official duty, would be briefed by White House officials on which Democratic House members are considered top targets by the Republican Party for defeat in 2008. Nor do I understand why Department employees would need to be briefed on ‘key media markets’ in states that are ‘competitive’ for the President.”

It’s probably too much to ask, but Snow’s responses to reporters’ questions yesterday were insulting. They deserve some follow-up.

A lot of what we get from this administration is insulting, and I think it is a reflection of their basic contempt for us, and their belief that we really do not need to know what they’re doing at any given moment. When we ask, we get sarcasm and condescension, or we get a rhetorical pat on the head, accompanied by a patronizing response that is a version of, “there, there; you don’t need to worry about that.”

What’s interesting to me is that, had those appointed to diplomatic positions had qualifications other than the size of their contributions to the GOP and the Bush campaigns, they might have raised an objection themselves to these little information sessions – but since they got their postings precisely because they have proven their political worthiness, such a presentation probably just seemed like business as usual.

Yeah, yeah, I know that these appointments are typically rewards for big donors, so maybe I should say that it wasn’t so much that the diplomats didn’t know any better that this was improper, it was more that the WH should have known it was improper and not taken advantage of their appointees in this way.

  • What really p*sses me of is that this is all done on the taxpayer’s dime. Our tax dollars are funding the overthrow of our own government.

  • I continue to wonder why the WH Press Corps continue to go to those lame briefings. Everyone knows that Snow or whomever is going to either lie or dissemble. It’s not like he gives them nothing meaty, unless reasons to mock or be angry is meaty.

  • Here’s the parallel story –Paul Kane’s column– in the WaPo. It reveals Karl Rove to be delusional and “spinning” like mad to cover his ass for the 2006 election losses. The short version: The Iraq war wasn’t the major cause of the election losses.

  • I agree with beep52. Shouldn’t the Republican party be paying for those briefings? I know they are illegal but the public will be more interested if the issue is approached from the “this is how the government is wasting your money” angle.

    I would love to see someone on an oversight committee present the Republican party with a bill for all those hours.

  • That’s the point — that the taxpayers are paying for Rethug campaigning. It makes their dollars and influence stretch farther, giving them an ADVANTAGE over the opposition that isn’t in power. That’s why it’s illegal and immoral.

  • Of course the don’t mention the term “rally” as in rallying support for but disguise it under the term “briefing”. Why was it even remotely necessary to have these “briefings”? Now Snow tries to negate the obvious reasons to avoid the “briefings” being seen as violations.

  • Comments are closed.