Shutting the Revolving Door on Sudan

Cabelly, who declined to speak publicly on the matter, reported to the Justice Department that his contract with Sudan paid his firm $530,000 a year plus transportation expenses.

The regime in Khartoum is considered one of the most vicious in the world. Its attacks against citizens in the Darfur region of western Sudan, in particular, have been widely described as genocide, including by the U.S. government.

The State Department wrote the following in 2005: "In Darfur, government and government-supported militia (Janjaweed) committed serious abuses during the year, including razing hundreds of villages of African tribes. Information available . . . indicated that genocide had been committed in Darfur, and the government and the Janjaweed bore responsibility."

Wolf saw the aftermath of those atrocities firsthand during a congressionally sponsored visit to the region in 2004. He returned to Washington even more committed than he already was to ending the government-sanctioned beatings, rapes and bombings that have killed millions over the past decade.

So when he read a brief news item about Cabelly's lobbying contract with Sudan last fall, he flew into a public rage.

In a speech on the House floor, Wolf called it "shocking news" that a lobbying shop had taken on so heinous a client. "Where will the lobbying wheel of fortune stop next?" he said.

Wolf called the State Department to make his opinion absolutely clear, and he wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to formalize his protest. In the letter to Rice, he said that Washington "appeared up for grabs to the highest bidder, with well-reputed lobbying shops representing the interest of some of the world's most unsavory governments."

The lawmaker trained his fire on the State Department because State was responsible for allowing Cabelly to lobby for Sudan. Clinton issued an executive order imposing sanctions on Sudan that prevented U.S. citizens from doing business with that country. Last summer, the State Department issued Cabelly a waiver from that ban.

Wolf's subsequent objections created serious trouble at State. The last thing any agency wants is to irritate the person who chairs a committee that controls its budget. In response to Wolf, the State Department tried to justify its decision by implying that the lobbyist was an informal back channel to the Sudanese.

"We believed that Robert Cabelly, in advising the Sudanese Government, would provide a perspective on United States concerns and policy that would be useful in advancing the peace process and resolving the crisis in Darfur," the department said in a statement.

Such double-edged arrangements are common in diplomacy. "When I was in government service, having a variety of channels open to governments could on occasion be useful," said Chester A. Crocker, a former assistant secretary of state for African affairs and a former boss of Cabelly's. "If the State Department wanted a channel of that kind, Cabelly has a track record of service in the executive branch and in Congress. He's a known quantity to a number of people still today."

Wolf rejected that explanation as improbable in Cabelly's instance and said he considered it inadequate even if it were true. "If you want to send a message, you don't hire lobbyists," Wolf said, especially one who wrote and distributed government news releases.

"There's a dumbing-down of the standards in Washington," Wolf charged. He hopes that lobbying legislation will improve the city's ethical IQ.

Jeffrey Birnbaum writes about the intersection of government and business every other Monday. His e-mail address iskstreetconfidential@washpost.com. He will be online to discuss proposed lobbying law changes today at noon athttp://www.washingtonpost.com/business.