The Same Old Operatives

Michael Kinsley has a column in the Washington Post that provides a pretty hard slam at the use of a commission to look at Iraq. He points out that commissions have generally been used in the past to recommend changes to social policies that have become too hot for politicians to handle. This new and novel approach to foreign affairs, however, is staffed by the same old group of political operatives and insiders that keep popping up. The few "fresh" faces are very familiar names. None of these people were voted into office, however.

If I told you that there was something in Washington called the Baker commission but didn't tell you what it was about, you still could probably name many of its members. If you are of a certain age, you might wonder, "Jim or Howard?" And you might have a quibble or two.

Where is Dick Holbrooke? Does Sandra Day O'Connor's new availability mean that Madeleine Albright is out of luck from now on? Are they sure that Larry Eagleburger is still alive? But Vernon Jordan is there, along with Ed Meese and Alan Simpson and Lee Hamilton. This is one torch that has not been passed to a new generation, although former Virginia senator and presidential son-in-law Charles Robb (age 67) is a fresh face in the pool of Washington Wise Men. Welcome, Chuck.

The Baker commission — that's James Baker, of course — was appointed by Congress to look into the situation in Iraq. It is expected to report early next month, and it is duly bouncing around and staffing up and holding hearings and all the things that prestigious commissions do.

Ordinarily a commission such as this has two possible purposes: action or inaction. Sometimes a problem is referred to a prestigious commission so that the commission can recommend doing things that everybody knows must be done but that nobody has the nerve to propose — at least nobody who has to run for office. The commission can ram this policy down the politicians' allegedly unwilling throats. If it is bipartisan — and what fun is a commission that isn't bipartisan? — the commission also protects both parties against a stab in the back by the other. This is how Social Security was reformed and saved the last time, when the chairman of the commission was Alan Greenspan, and undoubtedly this is how it will be reformed and saved again. Hey, Greenspan's available again. Come to think of it, why isn't he on this one? He is no expert on Iraq — but neither is Leon Panetta, another recent initiate into the Pantheon.

Welcome, Leon.

On the other hand, sometimes a problem is referred to a commission simply to get it off the table. Action is widely perceived as necessary, and the creation of a commission can be made to look like action.

Kinsley calls this one correctly, I think. The trial balloons that are being leaked all over the place right now are the stuff of venerable and experienced political operatives. The stuff of the same old "realism" that produced the situation that we are in today. Said "realism" also produced the last bad situation and the one before that , and on and on.

But not one member of this commission was voted for by the American people to decide foreign affairs for this nation. Not one was entrusted by the voters with decision-making power.

That is what everyone should be angry about at this point.