Signing Statements Strike a Nerve

"European Union countries have to be reckoned with, because some of them, and not the United States, have pledged in principle to put troops on the ground as part of an international force if conditions are right. . . .

"'Bush can say, "Boys, let's go," ' said one European participant. 'The only problem is that the boys are other countries' boys.'"

White House spokesman Tony Snow asked at yesterday's press briefing if Bush was still against an immediate cease-fire, replied with a showpiece of passive construction: "An immediate cease-fire is something that at this point doesn't seem to be in the cards. Neither side is headed that way."

Middle East: The Big Picture

Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes in the New York Times about Bush's strong predisposition to support Israel, and how his approach to the region contrasts with his father's.

"The first President Bush came to the Oval Office with long diplomatic experience, strong ties to Arab leaders and a realpolitik view that held the United States should pursue its own strategic interests, not high-minded goals like democracy, even if it meant negotiating with undemocratic governments like Syria and Iran.

"The current President Bush has practically cut off Syria and Iran, overlaying his fight against terrorism with the aim of creating what Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice calls 'a new Middle East.' In allying himself so closely with Israel, he has departed not just from his father's approach but also from those of all his recent predecessors, who saw themselves first and foremost as brokers in the region."

There's also his tendency to think all problems can be solved through the use of force. And even Bush's staunchest international ally has had second thoughts about that approach.

Patrick Wintour writes in the Guardian: "Tony Blair called for a fundamental reappraisal of British and U.S. foreign policy yesterday, admitting that excessive emphasis on military power and failure to address the Palestinian issue had left the west losing the battle for hearts and minds in the Middle East.

"In a speech to the World Affairs Council in Los Angeles, the prime minister admitted 'we are far from persuading those we need to persuade' that Western values were even-handed, fair and just in their application. He said there was no point disguising the damage being done to the cause of peace in the Middle East by the war on the Lebanese border, but suggested that when the war finally ended 'we must commit ourselves to a complete renaissance of our strategy to defeat those that threaten us'."

Torture Watch

Michael Scherer writes in Salon about how the pilot and Vietnam POW -- a staunch Republican -- who pushed through the War Crimes Act of 1996 is appalled that the Bush administration, facing possible prosecution for war crimes, is devising a legal escape hatch.

"Thanks to his persistent lobbying, Congress passed the War Crimes Act of 1996 with overwhelming bipartisan support. For the first time, U.S. courts were granted authority to convict any foreigner who commits a war crime against an American, or any American who commits a war crime at all. At the time, nobody could have predicted that a decade later a U.S. administration, with the explicit consent of the president and the attorney general, would be accused of systematic war crimes."

Flash forward to today: "To preempt any prosecution, administration officials are now quietly circulating legislation to change the statutory interpretation of the War Crimes Act of 1996. In short, the legislation would make it difficult to prosecute U.S. personnel for the harsh interrogation methods authorized by President Bush and the Justice Department."