Closed-Door Openness at Foggy Bottom

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Those wondering why the Bush administration has failed to spread democracy across the globe might find a clue in yesterday's meeting of the State Department's "Advisory Committee on Democracy Promotion."

About a third of the way through the meeting, and not long after Undersecretary Paula Dobriansky boasted to the television cameras that "our entire session today is open to the public" and attended by the press, State Department officials ordered reporters to leave.

"This is the way they wanted it to happen, and this is the way it's going to be," explained department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos. "They seem to have wanted you all out."

The spokesman declined to say who "they" were. "You got a problem?" Gallegos challenged. "Write a letter."

So much for promoting the values of a liberal democracy.

The Iraq debacle has dashed President Bush's dreams of Middle Eastern democracy and blackened America's reputation across the globe. Vladimir Putin is reversing democratic gains in Russia, while free elections have had decidedly undesirable results in places such as the Palestinian territories. "We see democracy being hijacked all over the place," committee member Chester Crocker told his colleagues.

Confronting such inhospitable times, the democracy-promotion committee was having some problems of its own. The chairman, Anne-Marie Slaughter, couldn't make it to Foggy Bottom and had to participate by phone; a rainstorm left her stuck in New Jersey. Another committee member, Freedom House's Jennifer Windsor, complained that the recommendations Slaughter presented to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice didn't accurately reflect the committee's deliberations.

Then there was the question of what to say about Iraq, whose democracy has deteriorated to the point that it no longer qualifies to attend meetings of the Community of Democracies. The committee resolved to deal with this issue by avoiding it. In the three-hour meeting -- at least the portion of it reporters were allowed to witness -- Iraq got only three passing references.

To help fill the time without talking about Iraq, the committee members took turns bathing Rice in praise.

"You had no notes. You just spoke honestly to us. I was very impressed," said Mark Palmer.

"I have to say, as I listen to you, Madam Secretary, that something comes through that's very genuine," said Brian Atwood.

"Very comprehensive and coherent," commented Carl Gershman.

"Powerful," agreed Crocker.

"Your insightful words," said Kenneth Wollack, "come from the heart as well as the head."

Rice reciprocated by praising her committee. "We've already gotten some outstanding recommendations. . . . I think the other recommendations are great. . . . I couldn't agree more. . . . I agree completely. . . . Great comments. . . . I find myself in violent agreement with what's been said around the table."

The secretary of state offered the committee members a provocative thought to start their deliberations. She asserted that the "first goal" of American foreign policy should be developing democracies. "Now, why don't I say 'war on terror' or whatever?" she continued. "Because without well-governed, democratic states, you're likely to have failed states or authoritarian states that are going to submerge but not deal with the unhealthy political forces that lead to extremism."

But the participants' thoughts were more academic as they moved from election management to Bangladesh to education to the relative merits of opium poppy and pomegranates in Afghanistan.

"Poverty is a cancer that affects democracy," Atwood argued.

"The real cancer is corruption," Gershman rebutted.

Nourished by a spread of bagels and seated in a square around an elaborate display of houseplants, the committee members grew bolder after Rice left the room. A reporter, finally permitted by State Department officials to return to the meeting, was in place to record some of it.

Crocker noted that "we have to be able to cope with the argument that the U.S. is inconsistent and hypocritical in its promotion of democracy around the world. That may be true."

After the State Department's Rose Likins gave a report about foreign service training, committee member Joshua Muravchik said, "I come away just shaking my head at the complete absence of a sense of political strategy or political skills on the part of our people."

Gershman added that in the "inhospitable" Middle East, "it's just not a matter of training embassies to sort of be sensitive to dissidents."

"I'm distressed," Likins responded, "to hear the news that you think 90 percent of the people that you met in the field doing this are not doing it effectively."

Windsor criticized the State Department for requesting a decrease in funding for civil society and human rights in the 2008 budget. "That doesn't send a very good message," she protested.

Gershman noted that some of the administration's democracy promoting programs "could be seen as token gestures."

"This is a bad period for a lot of reasons," added Gershman, president of the National Endowment for Democracy. "The political dynamic that we represent, the forces we support, have been put on the defensive."

Sharp words. Fortunately for the State Department, Rice and the television cameras were gone.