“The president is not going to trim his sails or pull back,” Mr Powell told the Financial Times on Monday. “It's a continuation of his principles, his policies, his beliefs.” In his first interview since the presidential election last Tuesday, Mr Powell stressed Mr Bush had won a mandate to pursue a foreign policy that was in the US national interest.Reading that far into the article, it sounds like Powell was instructed to provide comforting answer to the worries (or claims on the Bush II agenda) of the more vociferous of the neo-cons, as outlined in the recent neo-con foreign policy checklist, as produced by Frank Gaffney, which we wrote about earlier.
That policy would also be in the interest of friends and alliances, and while it would be “multilateral in nature”, the US would act alone where necessary.
[...]
While referring to the controversy over Iraq and the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Mr Powell stressed that an aggressive foreign policy also covered an active approach to combating Aids and developing world issues.
But with respect to several items on the Gaffney checklist, this may be Powell's way of using the Bush Admin's favorite technique. Continue the same public tone and vocabulary so as to claim that Bush isn't rethinking anything, let alone deciding to change direction, while making significant adjustments to reality.
On the fear of throwing Israel to the wolves:
We are ready to seize this opportunity aggressively,” he said, showing Washington's readiness to join Tony Blair, the British prime minister, who is due to visit the White House this week, in making Middle East policy a priority.This follows the meeting last Friday in Washington between the US with EU representatives regarding Israel-Palestinian policy, especially in light of the probable near-term offical demise of Chairman Arafat. The meeting also was undoubtedly part of the preparations for Bush's meeting with Blair, at which the Middle East peace process is to be the top foreign policy issue according to Prime Minister Blair.
Mr Powell described the peace process as “one of the biggest overhangs in our foreign policy, the way it is perceived”. He did not elaborate on how the US intended to become more involved and warned that it still needed responsible partners on the Palestinian side.
On regime change as the underlying objective of US policy toward Iran:
The US had not endorsed a European proposal [regarding nuclear technology] and Iran should not be given another chance to “slip away” from referral to the United Nations Security Council, he said, while confirming that “regime change” was not the US policy towards Iran. Iran and the US will be sitting at the same table in Egypt later this month at a conference on Iraq.Watch this space for neo-con responses.
Asked if this could lead to more direct contact with Iran, Mr Powell replied: “We will see what develops.”
The first afoe European weblog awards