Knowing When to Duck

By Christopher Ogden/Washington

The question concerned accountability, and James Baker would have none of it. In a television interview last week, the Secretary of State was pointedly asked by New York Times reporter R.W. Apple Jr. why the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, on Baker's direct orders, told Saddam Hussein in late July that the U.S. took no position on Iraq's border and economic dispute with Kuwait. A week later, Iraq invaded the emirate.

Baker said he agreed with a Washington Post columnist who had called such questions "retrospective scapegoating" and "shameful." He added, "We've got some 20/20 hindsight going on that's been highly critical, frankly, of some very fine career public servants," meaning Ambassador April Glaspie and John Kelly, the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian affairs. The criticism, replied Apple, was not aimed at the diplomats. "They're trying to criticize you."

The reporter was on target. But rather than accept responsibility for the Administration's initially conciliatory policy toward Baghdad, Baker attempted an unseemly dodge. "You want me to say those instructions were sent specifically by me on my specific orders," said Baker. "There are probably 312,000 cables or so that go out under my name as Secretary of State."

Baker may be right in branding suggestions that the U.S. somehow encouraged Baghdad's aggression "absolutely ludicrous." But the incident revealed anew that taking blame as well as credit is not Baker's style. The trait predates his 20 months at the State Department. During the 1988 presidential campaign, Baker labored to keep his fingerprints off the controversial Willie Horton ads, although as campaign manager he was ultimately responsible for their repeated airing. When Bush selected the callow Dan Quayle as his running mate, Baker distanced himself from the choice. When the U.S. invaded Panama last December, Baker was scarcely to be seen. When the Administration was accused of appeasing China after the Beijing massacre, Baker lied publicly about secretive U.S. contacts between high-level Chinese officials and National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft. In sharp contrast, George Bush, who never ducks, took the criticism for his own policy.

No one is calling for Baker's resignation, nor should they. For the most part, he has worked tirelessly and performed well at a complex juncture in foreign affairs. In fact, Baker did not have his eye on the mounting dangers in the Persian Gulf because he was preoccupied with the collapse of the Soviet empire and German unification. Nonetheless, Baker's tendency to dissociate himself from policies that fare poorly is a pattern that increasingly disturbs less agile associates. "When it hits the fan," said a Foggy Bottom veteran, "he's in the shower."